# Torn between 2700X and 8700K



## xkm1948 (Aug 28, 2018)

Building a mITX PC for a family member to be used almost exclusively for MMORPG and RPG. I will be passing the FuryX to the build so the GPU part is settled. The monitor I have in mind is a 32'' 1440p Samsung one. Now it seems the most difficult part is deciding between 2700X and 8700K. So here are the specs I have in mind:

CPU: 2700X or 8700K
MoBo: Z370-ITX or B450-ITX
Cooler: Corsair X115i Pro
RAM: Corsair Vegence RGB PRO DDR4-3200 16GB
Storage: 970Evo 1TB
GPU: FuryX
PSU: EVGA 750Watt
Chassis: NZXT Manta
Monitor: Samsung C32H711

The ONLY productivity done on this computer will be some studio recording/processing and word processing.  So what do you guys think?


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 28, 2018)

8700K might give you better overall FPS because of clockspeed (which, generally speaking, isn't truly going to affect how games play), but having a unified AMD system seems to appeal to me far more, just for ease of driver installs, etc. I'd even go so far as to buy a board that matches the brand of the VGA, too.


----------



## xkm1948 (Aug 28, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> 8700K might give you better overall FPS because of clockspeed (which, generally speaking, isn't truly going to affect how games play), but having a unified AMD system seems to appeal to me far more, just for ease of driver installs, etc. I'd even go so far as to buy a board that matches the brand of the VGA, too.




Wooo fancy seeing you here!

Since you are here I do have some questions for ya:

Are Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO considered better or worse or equal comparing to GSKill Trident RGB?


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 28, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Wooo fancy seeing you here!
> 
> Since you are here I do have some questions for ya:
> 
> Are Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO considered better or worse or equal comparing to GSKill Trident RGB?


Out of the box, the G.SKill kit has better XMP profile timings. As to how they are binned, I can't really comment except on the specific kits I have. If you have other Corsair iCue-compatible stuff, the Corsair's software makes a great case to buy them, but without, it's more about what catches your eye as it seems to me that G.Skill and Corsair are binning these sticks fairly evenly.


----------



## hat (Aug 28, 2018)

8*6*00k?


----------



## AlwaysHope (Aug 28, 2018)

There are reviews speaking specifically about these 2 cpus on Youtube in comprison among other cpus related to their family groups, look them up.  Value for money though, the 2700X wins.


----------



## IceShroom (Aug 28, 2018)

As you have 1440p monitor, my suggestion 2700X.


----------



## Melvis (Aug 28, 2018)

IceShroom said:


> As you have 1440p monitor, my suggestion 2700X.



Exactly this!

If your going to be at 1440P the difference in FPS between the two will be sweet stuff all, might as well save yourself some money and go with the AMD, if you look hard enough you can find the 2700X very cheap, under $300US like I did. ($260US I think I got it for)


----------



## londiste (Aug 28, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> having a unified AMD system seems to appeal to me far more, just for ease of driver installs, etc. I'd even go so far as to buy a board that matches the brand of the VGA, too.


Other than questionably aesthetics, there is really no value in matching brands.

Especially with ITX box and a fairly old GPU take into consideration that with 2700X you will not be able to run the computer without GPU. I have usually spent some time without one while upgrading.

2700X and 8700K are fairly even. You are better off looking at the motherboards, their layouts and featuresets.
For example M.2 slot at the front of the motherboard (under a heatsink as these tend to be these days) would be better than having it at the back of the board, especially with Samsung's NVME drives.
Manta is not too small but it does get crowded. Having plugs at the edges of the board would be useful - no 4/8-pin power in the middle of the board next to backplate. some reasonable place for that stupid USB 3.0 plug etc.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Aug 28, 2018)

Was going to say 2700X because it pulls less power when you start pushing up the clocks but with that cooler I wouldn't be to fussed, 8700k should net you a bit more FPS in some games, 2700X should be lower power.

And yeah as mentioned above I would look at board functionality as well.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 28, 2018)

londiste said:


> Other than questionably aesthetics, there is really no value in matching brands.


Having tested countless boards and configs for reviews, I do not agree. Getting unified software for everything greatly uncomplicates things for general users, and I'm pretty sure that the OP isn't going to let his HEDT rigs languish and this is a rig he's building for someone else who doesn't know PCs as well as he does. He even said "building for a family member".

My own rig is completely comprised of parts from the same brand, I eschew this idea so much. RGB LED control softwares further exacerbate this. You don't want to provide a non-enthusiast with software glitches, IMHO.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Aug 28, 2018)

I can't understand the "1440p so 2700x" logic. Why ? If that is true, then get a 8400 or 2600x.


----------



## londiste (Aug 28, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> RGB LED control softwares further exacerbate this. You don't want to provide a non-enthusiast with software glitches, IMHO.


RGB LED control is one of the few cases where using the same brand is a good idea.

In any other case, who the hell would want to actually install manufacturer's crapware? I have been playing around with software from ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI, ASRock, Gainward, NZXT and a bunch of peripheral manufacturers. I would not want to touch any of that with a 10-feet pole unless I really-*really *have to.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 28, 2018)

londiste said:


> RGB LED control is one of the few cases where using the same brand is a good idea.
> 
> In any other case, who the hell would want to actually install manufacturer's crapware? I have been playing around with software from ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI, ASRock, Gainward, NZXT and a bunch of peripheral manufacturers. I would not want to touch any of that with a 10-feet pole unless I really-*really *have to.


 If you like fast USB charging, you typically don't have a choice. Or maybe you like the tool that gets you directly in BIOS from desktop. Or you want fan control from in the OS because your fans are noisy and annoying. Maybe you want one-click OC profiling. Maybe you want to change you hardware's LED colors. You really can't get these things without the provided software. Could some use an improvement? Sure. But are they in general that bad? NOPE. I find the typical alternatives that people use for these things far worse than what comes by the product maker.


----------



## John Naylor (Aug 29, 2018)

1.  At 32" a 1440p monitor is past the edge of where you wanna be and will appear "grainy" to most folks with "normal vision".  Samsung plays a bit fast and loose with their advertised specs.  I couldn't find you specific model but did a quick comparison with the closest I could find... C32HG70.  The reviewed model has an advertised minimum response time of 1ms, which under testing came out with  and average of 13.6ms and a worst case of 37.5 ms

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/samsung_c32hg70/response_6.png



> The main issue from a gaming point of view though was the response times.   VA panels often have problems here, but the slow rise times caused some issues. This led to black smearing on moving content, particularly on darker backgrounds which you can't eliminate. The slow overall response times also created a limitation with the refresh rate, .... In non-gaming areas the other main draw-back of the screen was the use of PWM for backlight dimming. This could put some users off if they are susceptible to flicker or eye related issues.



I'd take a look at how much your selected model has in common with the reviewed one or foind some other reviews from sites that actually have the expertise and test equipment to provide useful info.

2.  The platform determoination was mde here when you said "*almost exclusively *for MMORPG and RPG "... I'd do 8600k
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700X/images/perfrel_2560_1440.png

3.  The money spent on the cooler is a waste.  A $45 Scythe Fuma will leave you with an extra $100

4.  You don't say which EVGA PSU, some are good / some are not but the Seasonic Focus Plus Series is one of the best but around right now and it's not expensive..   The 550 and 850 both got 10 Performance and Build Quality Ratings... they didn't reviuew the 550 which is what Id use here... the 750 was reviewed but was some soldering issue on the sample they rec'd.  usually around $75 bit seen in $50's when specials run.

5.  As for brand matching, there is one very real advantage to going so ... but I am not talkin AMD / Inte;l or AMD / nVidia.     When you call tech support, the 1st move the technician is taught to make is "blame the other guy" in order to meet their No. 1 priority ... and that is getting you off the phone.   So if you have n Asus MoBo and an MSI card, 9 / 10 times the guy will just say "It's the GFX card".  When they both same brand, they can't get away with that.  Phanteks is the only manufacturer I have seen do LED lighting tastefully ... When I see most RGB builds I am half expecting to look thru the case window and see a  Barbie sized stripper pole dancing.

6.  As for the manufacturer supplied utilities, years ago I wouldn't have bothered, but today...

a)    The Speed Control of water pumps and fans in MoBo utilities as as slick as you are going to get.  Nothoing else comes close.
b)    The driver tracking and update utilities are aften useful
c)     The built-in over clocking utilities, especially MSIs are actually very good.  No, you won't get your best OC but 1)  They get you very much in the ball park and as good as you are going to get for a small input of your time ... you can get it batter manually ... but having dome so many times, I sometimes want those 2 - 3 days of my life back.
d)    The only think I need to know about RGB utilities is how to disable them.


----------



## AlwaysHope (Aug 29, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> I can't understand the "1440p so 2700x" logic. Why ? If that is true, then get a 8400 or 2600x.



Agreed & even if one had a 1080P monitor, VSR can provide 2K & 4K anyway on selected VGAs 12 threads in that 2600X, how many AAA games today use that?


----------



## londiste (Aug 29, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> If you like fast USB charging, you typically don't have a choice. Or maybe you like the tool that gets you directly in BIOS from desktop. Or you want fan control from in the OS because your fans are noisy and annoying. Maybe you want one-click OC profiling. Maybe you want to change you hardware's LED colors. You really can't get these things without the provided software. Could some use an improvement? Sure. But are they in general that bad? NOPE. I find the typical alternatives that people use for these things far worse than what comes by the product maker.


All of these are enthusiast-grade things


----------



## cucker tarlson (Aug 29, 2018)

I agree 8600k is the best option. @John Naylor the cooler has to fit and itx case.


----------



## AlwaysHope (Aug 29, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> I agree 8600k is the best option. @John Naylor the cooler has to fit and itx case.


& what about future cpu upgrades? 
at least AMD have AM4 until 2020.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Aug 29, 2018)

will he need to upgrade that cpu for fury x ? does the op mention upgrading as one of the factors ? will amd have something faster than 8600k oc for mmorpg gaming,which is usually more single thread heavy, in 2020 ? is your question really relevant here at this point?


----------



## londiste (Aug 29, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> I agree 8600k is the best option. @John Naylor the cooler has to fit and itx case.


Manta isn't much of an ITX case. It is the size of a small mATX case and CPU cooler clearance is 160 mm.


John Naylor said:


> 3.  The money spent on the cooler is a waste.  A $45 Scythe Fuma will leave you with an extra $100


The thing is, that case is small in terms of volume and leaving warm air inside it heats the insides up fast. If the CLC can be fit at the top of the case, blowing warm air out, that is an ideal scenario. If the CLC radiator has to be at the front, it's less ideal but at least then CPU will be cooled with cooler air.


----------



## John Naylor (Aug 29, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> I agree 8600k is the best option. @John Naylor the cooler has to fit and itx case.



That's not a problem.

CPU Clearance: 160mm
Fuma is only 149mm tall




londiste said:


> Manta isn't much of an ITX case. It is the size of a small mATX case and CPU cooler clearance is 160 mm.
> The thing is, that case is small in terms of volume and leaving warm air inside it heats the insides up fast. If the CLC can be fit at the top of the case, blowing warm air out, that is an ideal scenario. If the CLC radiator has to be at the front, it's less ideal but at least then CPU will be cooled with cooler air.



This is a fallacy.  Yes we all  learned in 8th grade earth science that hot air rises.  But, when fans are present, the effect is dwarfed by the force of the fans to an extent that any lighter air effect is non existent.  There are two rules for water cooling and most  CLCs users are violating both of them:

1.  Never, ever mix metals.  Aluminum rads and copper blocks create  galvanic corrosion cell.  Its ugly and performance degrades rapidly
https://martinsliquidlab.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/corrosion-explored/

2.  All rad fans blow in... no exceptions.... ever

 We can assume one of two things:

a)  Corsair who markets and services the product, has some inkling as to how it should be used.  And they state in the installation instructions _*"For best cooling performance, we recommend performance, mounting the fans as an air intake into your PC case."*_
https://www.corsair.com/corsairmedia/sys_master/productcontent/49-000175_rev_AB_H100i_QSG_web.pdf

b)  Everyone who has taken 8th grade earth science knows more about PC cooling than the engineers at every water cooling component manufacturer.

As an engineer running a consulting firm and being involved in the design of cooling systems for buildings and power systems for > 40 years, my education and experience agrees with the engineers at Corsair.

The other fallacy is that the orientation of the fans somehow has an effect in air flow.   What most users fail to recognize is that the vented slot covers and case grilles are an integral part of the cooling design.  In summer, when you put an exhaust fan in one window, it does nothing until you open another window.  But do you need to a 2nd fan blowing into the room ?  Or, if you stand in front of the window, do you feel a breeze ?  Of course you do.  So if you installed that fan to blow in, you'd have the exact amount of air blowing out that other window.... Yes, **absolutely** the same air flow thru the room regardless of whether the window fan is intake or exhaust.  If the same amount of air was not going in and out, your house would have to either explode or implode.

Whether a fan is installed as intake or exhaust depends on the position in the case.  If you have 3 fans pushing 20 cfm each as intakes.... then 60 cfm of air is being pushed out if the case ... reverse the fans and you have 60 cfm of air being sucked into the case.  So overall case air turnover is exactly the same

So here's what happens when you defy the manufacturer's written instructions and install those CLC fans as exhaust in this particular case with ....  

Front: 2 x 140/120mm
Top: 2 x 140/120mm 
Rear: 1 x 120mm (Included) 

So we have two fans blowing in and 3 fans blowing out ....2 of which are extreme speed CLC fans.  So it's obvious that we have a lot more air blowing out than blowing in creating a negative pressure situation within the case.   yeah we all know about the dust issue, but that's minor compared to the heat it brings intoi the case.  That CLC heat we are exhausting is  from a105 watt CPU TDP.   So you are pushing 105 watts of heat out.  But let's remember, a substantial amount of air is being sucked in because of the negative case pressure and the path of least resistance is the back of the case slot covers and rear grilles.  So what is the air like behind that case ?  

According to TPU testing, that Fury X is pushing out some 260 watts and can hit peaks of 450 watts.  Add on the hot exhaust from that 750 watt PSU (assume 500 watts in use) .   So the question is .... what is the advantage of  trying to cool that *105 watt* 2700x *with air that has been pre-heated with hot exhaust from a 260 watt GFX card and a 500 watt PSU*.

We use a water cooled test bed with 6 temperature sensors, four measure water temps at various points in the loop reading coolant temps in and out of each radiator.  The other two measure ambient air and interior case temperature.  The case allows up to 10 radiator fans and 6 case fans.    The most telling tool however is the fog machine, stolen from my son when he lost interest in his "garage band".   By placing the fog discharge at various points around the case we can see whether case pressure is positive or negative ... and when setting up the system as you describe with top rad fans as exhaust, pointing the fog behind the case, it immediately fills up with fog.

There's no mystery here ... contrary to popular belief, the hot air is by no means trapped inside the case when rad fans blow in.   Cool ambient air is blown into the case.... and it exits thru the exhaust fans and grille openings.    Case air turnover is usually in the range of 1.5 to 2.0 times ***per second***.   The main difference is ... instead of the hot exhaust from behind the case getting sucked into the case ..... only cool ambient air comes in.  The test bed has a Reeven Six Eyes which digitally diplays the output of those 6 temp sensors 24/7.  No matter what I throw at it.... rare to see interior case temps more than 2C above ambient.

So no, blowing rad air out is the opposite of an ideal scenario because you are sucking hotter air in than you are blowing out and you are cooling the one thing in yiour system that you decided needed water cooling with doubly preheated air.... air coming in is preheated by GFX card and PSU exhaust and then by everything inside yoiu case BEFORE it can have any impact on the one thing that you thought warranted ater cooling.

Finally, recognize that the air flow of the fans mounted on the rad will push less air than if there was no radiator due to the resistance to flow presented by the fans.  So if anything, you have less case air cooling with the rad than without.


----------



## Enterprise24 (Aug 29, 2018)

Fury X at 1440p ? Shouldn't matter if that is 60Hz or 144Hz since you will be limited by GPU anyways so either choice is fine.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 29, 2018)

John Naylor said:


> 1.  Never, ever mix metals.  Aluminum rads and copper blocks create  galvanic corrosion cell.  Its ugly and performance degrades rapidly
> https://martinsliquidlab.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/corrosion-explored/



This supposes that the cooling medium (coolant) allows for this. Most AIO water coolers use a 80-95% glycol mix that prevents corrosion, and also makes a lot of the data at Martin's LLs invalid, since his data is derived with distilled water.

I did happen to go to school for HVAC design and completed with honors. The number of fallacies out in the enthusiast world when it comes to water cooling is astounding, for sure, but that one thing that people miss, that glycol is not water, and doesn't behave like water in flow rate or heat capacity, is fantastic.


----------



## JRMBelgium (Aug 29, 2018)

Well, since you don't seem to upgrade every year. I voted 2700x.
The platform seems more future proof then Intel's current platform.


----------



## Vlada011 (Aug 29, 2018)

Wait i9-9900K I expect to price go down first for AMD Ryzen 2 and than Intel will need to drop price.
If I need to choose between these two than i7-8700K because you can upgrade on i9-9900K.
One thing is very important i7-9700K and i9-9900K will be soldered, same as AMD, no need for deliding.


----------



## xkm1948 (Aug 29, 2018)

Hmm, so Z370 may be able to support 9000 seires CPU as well? Interesting.


----------



## Vlada011 (Aug 30, 2018)

People advice looking now situation, rearly look some side things and future.
Why you need computer? If you need for games than i7-8700K core is dominant to 2700X core.
If you need more cores than you could sell i7-8700K or wait i9-9900K. He will be and solder and same number cores as 2700X and better core speed but price will be 150$ higher.


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 31, 2018)

As much as I give shit to Intel for all their BS, they do have a strong clock advantage which, if you're a gamer is very tempting. I really hope AMD can do some magic with Zen 2 to address this. Zen+ already showed slight benefits, but they still need 500-700MHz more for the boost clock to really threaten Intel in all departments.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 31, 2018)

If you weren't going mini-ITX, I'd definitely recommend the 8700k(or wait for 9700k), because the X370 platform is just significantly more flexible and mature than the B450.  But since you are building mini-ITX, most of the advantages that X370 has goes away with the limited slot configuration and space.  The other consideration, especially with a SFF build, is heat.  The 2700X is going to be putting out a good 30-40 more W of heat under load than the 8700K.  The 2700X might run cooler, thanks to the soldered IHS, but it will be putting out more heat.  This isn't too big of a deal because of the H115i, which will easily be able to handle either processor. And as long as the fans are configured as exhaust, the extra heat won't be dumped into the case.  However, the VRMs will also be putting out more heat into the case with the 2700X, so that is something to consider as well.

In the end, I think I'd recommend the 2700X.  It does have significantly better multi-threading capability than the 8700K. In games you won't notice the difference between the 2700X and 8700K most of the time, because your GPU will likely be the limiting factor.



AlwaysHope said:


> & what about future cpu upgrades?
> at least AMD have AM4 until 2020.



Everyone keeps saying this, but just because they are going to keep using AM4 through 2020, doesn't mean the old motherboard will support new processors.  In fact there is already grumblings of new AM4 motherboards dropping support for Bristol Ridge CPUs, because they are out of space in the UEFI to store the microcode for all the processors.  This very much, to me, suggested that even though they will be using the same socket for a long while, the motherboards(and chipsets maybe even) will only support a range of processors.  So there is no guarantee that old motherboards will support new processors.


----------



## xkm1948 (Aug 31, 2018)

Leaning towards 8700K or 8600K now. Z370 offers a path to 8 cores but I doubt I will ever need to provide that many cores to a gaming system anyway.


----------



## JRMBelgium (Aug 31, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Leaning towards 8700K or 8600K now. Z370 offers a path to 8 cores but I doubt I will ever need to provide that many cores to a gaming system anyway.



Battlefield V will support up to 12 threads.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Sep 1, 2018)

Verbatim said:


> Go for Ryzen 7 2700X right now intel or nvidia just don't deserve any money from buyers.


that's helpful.


----------



## hat (Sep 4, 2018)

newtekie1 said:


> Everyone keeps saying this, but just because they are going to keep using AM4 through 2020, doesn't mean the old motherboard will support new processors.  In fact there is already grumblings of new AM4 motherboards dropping support for Bristol Ridge CPUs, because they are out of space in the UEFI to store the microcode for all the processors.  This very much, to me, suggested that even though they will be using the same socket for a long while, the motherboards(and chipsets maybe even) will only support a range of processors.  So there is no guarantee that old motherboards will support new processors.



A lot of weight on that definitely lays on the particular board. Socket 775 lasted forever, but newer chips weren't always compatible with older boards.

Running out of space on UEFI seems ridiculous though. I would totally appreciate a board that "sacrificed" the flashy UEFI interface and junk nobody ever uses to have more room for, well, useful stuff. I seriously don't need a mouse or a pretty interface to get shit done in UEFI.


----------



## Melvis (Sep 4, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Z370 offers a path to 8 cores



Are you 100% sure on that? This is intel we are talking about here.


----------



## newtekie1 (Sep 4, 2018)

hat said:


> A lot of weight on that definitely lays on the particular board. Socket 775 lasted forever, but newer chips weren't always compatible with older boards.
> 
> Running out of space on UEFI seems ridiculous though. I would totally appreciate a board that "sacrificed" the flashy UEFI interface and junk nobody ever uses to have more room for, well, useful stuff. I seriously don't need a mouse or a pretty interface to get shit done in UEFI.



It isn't really that UEFI itself is running out of space. One of the benefits of UEFI, it is expandable unlike the traditional BIOS.  The issue is the ROM chips used to store the UEFI.  With the current 16MB chips used on almost all motherboards, they are running out of space to store CPU microcode.  They _could _install 32MB chips, but apparently they cost about 3-4 times as much as the 16MB chips , and of course motherboard manufacturers have huge stockpiles of the 16MB chips.

But, still, I forsee a situation very similar to 775 where even though the socket is the same, it doesn't mean the motherboard can accept all the processors that fit that socket.



Melvis said:


> Are you 100% sure on that? This is intel we are talking about here.



Nothing in their history has suggested otherwise.


----------



## hat (Sep 4, 2018)

newtekie1 said:


> It isn't really that UEFI itself is running out of space. One of the benefits of UEFI, it is expandable unlike the traditional BIOS.  The issue is the ROM chips used to store the UEFI.  With the current 16MB chips used on almost all motherboards, they are running out of space to store CPU microcode.  They _could _install 32MB chips, but apparently they cost about 3-4 times as much as the 16MB chips , and of course motherboard manufacturers have huge stockpiles of the 16MB chips.
> 
> But, still, I forsee a situation very similar to 775 where even though the socket is the same, it doesn't mean the motherboard can accept all the processors that fit that socket.



My point still stands though; if they'd axe some of that unnecessary "garbage", they'd have plenty of room to support more hardware.


----------



## newtekie1 (Sep 4, 2018)

hat said:


> My point still stands though; if they'd axe some of that unnecessary "garbage", they'd have plenty of room to support more hardware.



Oh, I agree.  I'd much rather have a basic GUI instead of these fancy HD ones they include that are just wasting space on the ROM.


----------



## notb (Sep 4, 2018)

AlwaysHope said:


> & what about future cpu upgrades?
> at least AMD have AM4 until 2020.


Don't you think this argument is getting a bit old and overused? 2020 is just 2 years from now. When will you stop using it? 
8700K or even 8600K will be plenty fast for next 4 years of MMORPG/RPG - especially with a Fury X.

Since this is a high-end build, the whole "AM4 upgrade path" is less relevant than in budget PCs. OP wants a B450 mobo - that's just $100.

Also, what's the lifespan of current Intel platform? It turns out that both 1151v2 and 300-series chipsets support 8C.
Intel can be themselves and change the socket next year... but they could also keep it for another 3 years and troll AMD hard. 


xkm1948 said:


> CPU: 2700X or 8700K
> MoBo: Z370-ITX or B450-ITX
> Cooler: Corsair X115i Pro
> PSU: EVGA 750Watt


I know it's some really extreme thinking for this forum, but why so much fuss to OC? It's just a gaming rig.
Considering the GPU is just Fury X, you could go for an 8400, H370, decent air cooler and a cheaper PSU.
You're adding around $400 ($150 + $100 + $100 + $50 respectively) for maybe 10% more fps.
I'd save the money, stop caring about upgrading and just replace the whole thing earlier. It's not like that Fury X will last forever...


----------



## Melvis (Sep 4, 2018)

newtekie1 said:


> Nothing in their history has suggested otherwise.



Ummm just last year...


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 4, 2018)

You say RPG and MMORPG
There is really only one option:

Go Intel, get a high OC out of a 6- or 8-core Coffee Lake and call it a day. You'll want the single thread. I still play Guild Wars 2 which has nice threading for a DX9 game but it all still hinges on the single thread. I'm one of the happy few that can hold 60+ FPS in every player hub in that game. WvW? Fluid 100-120 fps. But that CPU is working. HARD. When I played this game on a 3570k @ 4.4 Ghz, at times it was stuttery and in busy player hubs I'd drop to 30-45 FPS. Go figure...

I would suggest going 8600K. No issues with heat, can clock beyond 5.0 without much problems and is well priced. Ryzen is a waste of time IMO in this use case and high core counts don't really do anything for it either.


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 4, 2018)

Jelle Mees said:


> Battlefield V will support up to 12 threads.


The exact amount the 8700k has


----------



## btarunr (Sep 4, 2018)

Buy a Ryzen 7 2700X. 

Even Intel believes it isn't future-proof enough (and is rushing in 9700K/9900K).


----------



## notb (Sep 4, 2018)

btarunr said:


> Even Intel believes it isn't future-proof enough (and is rushing in 9700K/9900K).


What makes you think they're rushing 9th gen?


----------



## newtekie1 (Sep 4, 2018)

Melvis said:


> Ummm just last year...



They did nothing last year to suggest X370 wouldn't support the upcoming 9th gen.


----------



## btarunr (Sep 4, 2018)

notb said:


> What makes you think they're rushing 9th gen?



Core i7-7700K launched 17 months after its predecessor, i7-6700K, which in turn launched 26 months after its predecessor, i7-4770K, which in turn launched 15 months after i7-3770K, which in turn launched 14 months after i7-2600K, which launched 14 months after i7-870. 9 years of 4-core/8-thread at $300-ish.

AMD effed i7-7700K raw with Ryzen "Summit Ridge," and i7-8700K was born 9 months after its predecessor (even forcing a motherboard upgrade). I expect it will be 11~barely~12 months old before i7-9700K succeeds it. 

So in a span of 18 months, Intel decided 4 cores isn't future-proof enough, and 6 cores isn't future-proof enough, and that people need 8 cores at $300-ish. Can't deny AMD reshaped Intel's lineup.

It's a rush.

By late-2018, AMD will be ready with a Zen 2 die, and if that ends up competitive (very likely), then hang tight, Intel will suddenly realize 8 cores aren't enough.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 4, 2018)

2700X is great but for this usage scenario high core clock 8700k/8600k may be better


----------



## notb (Sep 4, 2018)

btarunr said:


> I expect it will be 11~barely~12 months old before i7-9700K succeeds it. It's a rush.


And when AMD releases new Zen generations on yearly basis, is it also a rush?
I mean: Ryzen 1800X launched 29 months after FX-8370... ;-)


----------



## btarunr (Sep 4, 2018)

notb said:


> And when AMD releases new Zen generations on yearly basis, is it also a rush?
> I mean: Ryzen 1800X launched 29 months after FX-8370... ;-)



In the MSDT segment, Intel went from 4-core/8-thread  to 6-core/12-thread in 108 months; and from 6-core/12-thread to 8-core/16-thread in 11 months. It's a rush.


----------



## AlwaysHope (Sep 5, 2018)

notb said:


> Don't you think this argument is getting a bit old and overused? 2020 is just 2 years from now. When will you stop using it?
> 8700K or even 8600K will be plenty fast for next 4 years of MMORPG/RPG - especially with a Fury X.
> 
> Since this is a high-end build, the whole "AM4 upgrade path" is less relevant than in budget PCs. OP wants a B450 mobo - that's just $100.
> ...



No, not at all, its a fact from AMD. Please do demonstrate where I have used this claim before? I think your making that up that I"m overusing it. 

Judging by Intel's past history, its not out of the question they could change sockets next year at all. The last 10 yrs has demonstrated that fact.


----------



## Melvis (Sep 5, 2018)

newtekie1 said:


> They did nothing last year to suggest X370 wouldn't support the upcoming 9th gen.



No no I meant 7th gen to 8Th gen


----------



## cucker tarlson (Sep 5, 2018)

8600k or 9700k, that's it. I'd choose the cheaper 8600k, try to sell that fury x and get him a lightly used 1070ti/1080, there's gonna be people selling those card bought in early 2018 to get rtx.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 5, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> 8600k or 9700k, that's it. I'd choose the cheaper 8600k, try to sell that fury x and get him a lightly used 1070ti/1080, there's gonna be people selling those card bought in early 2018 to get rtx.



Nah the FuryX will definitely be kept. I am paying out of pocket so i have no intention to spend more than I should especially on GPU

Going 8700K BTW, the future owner saw this thread and asked me for that. Apparently some streaming of MMORPG is on the plate


----------



## newtekie1 (Sep 5, 2018)

Melvis said:


> No no I meant 7th gen to 8Th gen



And again, nothing to suggest the 9th gen wouldn't be supported by X370.


----------



## Melvis (Sep 6, 2018)

newtekie1 said:


> And again, nothing to suggest the 9th gen wouldn't be supported by X370.



and last yrs 7th to 8th gen suggest that it might not be supported.


----------



## newtekie1 (Sep 6, 2018)

Melvis said:


> and last yrs 7th to 8th gen suggest that it might not be supported.


No it doesn't. Each chipset has always supported 2 generations. It has been this way with Intel for like a decade now.


----------



## Melvis (Sep 6, 2018)

newtekie1 said:


> No it doesn't. Each chipset has always supported 2 generations. It has been this way with Intel for like a decade now.



Yeah this is true and I got confused and forgot that it was 6th/7th gen on the same socket, just remember everyone complaining about jumping onto 1151 in 2017 7th gen and then less then 8months later 8th gen came out and if you wanted 6cores you had to buy a new mobo, even though it was clearly possible to run 8th gen if they released a bios update.

Anyway my point still stands as this artical here states > https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...rough-geekbench-on-a-z370-motherboard.247308/ that intel would prefer you to use any 8core 9th gen CPU on the z390 chipset if your going to do any sort of OC and I bet you it still be very limited on Z370 boards that will support the 8core CPU's


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 6, 2018)

Purchased the 8700K today with a $25 discount code after chatting with a friendly newegg agent today. Not too bad. So I guess the debate is over. Went with Intel for the gaming build. I mean for REAL work I have my 6950X and access to a Threadripper 2.


----------



## dirtyferret (Sep 6, 2018)

btarunr said:


> Core i7-7700K launched 17 months after its predecessor, i7-6700K, which in turn launched 26 months after its predecessor, i7-4770K, which in turn launched 15 months after i7-3770K, which in turn launched 14 months after i7-2600K, which launched 14 months after i7-870. 9 years of 4-core/8-thread at $300-ish.
> 
> AMD effed i7-7700K raw with Ryzen "Summit Ridge," and i7-8700K was born 9 months after its predecessor (even forcing a motherboard upgrade). I expect it will be 11~barely~12 months old before i7-9700K succeeds it.
> 
> ...




The extra cores are nice but I think what both camps want to see are significant IPC gains.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 7, 2018)

Intel is compensating that with very high clocks. But they are at 5GHz now and they can't just go with clocks to infinity. They'll need to pull another Core architecture magic again, otherwise they'll be stuck. AMD has some room on Ryzens, but they are hitting the same obstacle in general... Then the question is, can there even be anything done to dramatically increase IPC and whether x86/x64 is the limiting factor.


----------



## AlwaysHope (Sep 8, 2018)

RejZoR said:


> Intel is compensating that with very high clocks. But they are at 5GHz now and they can't just go with clocks to infinity. They'll need to pull another Core architecture magic again, otherwise they'll be stuck. AMD has some room on Ryzens, but they are hitting the same obstacle in general... Then the question is, can there even be anything done to dramatically increase IPC and whether x86/x64 is the limiting factor.



Dramatically increasing IPC won't happen anymore with current silicon technology. I mean not much more room from 12nm to 1nm, considering how past generations have gone like from 45 >32 >22 >14>12 etc, Intel or AMD. We will have to wait for Quantum computing tech to be commercialized first imo before we see "dramatically increased IPC".


----------



## jboydgolfer (Sep 8, 2018)

If it's just gaming id go with a 8600K , that & 8Gb's Ram tears through games/multitasking


----------



## RealNeil (Sep 8, 2018)

John Naylor said:


> When I see most RGB builds I am half expecting to look thru the case window and see a Barbie sized stripper pole dancing.


LOL!



xkm1948 said:


> Purchased the 8700K today with a $25 discount code


Good, I really like both of mine.


----------



## AlwaysHope (Sep 8, 2018)

Congrats to OP for supporting the most corrupt, anti competitive, ant consumer & anti technology company in the entire semiconductor industry.


----------



## RealNeil (Sep 8, 2018)

AlwaysHope said:


> Congrats to OP for supporting the most corrupt, anti competitive, ant consumer & anti technology company in the entire semiconductor industry.



You need to congratulate the hell out of me then. I have five Intel CPUs to only one FX CPU.

EDIT: I just remembered that My wife's office PC has a Ryzen-5 1600X in it, so I have two AMD CPUs.


----------



## hat (Sep 8, 2018)

RejZoR said:


> Intel is compensating that with very high clocks. But they are at 5GHz now and they can't just go with clocks to infinity. They'll need to pull another Core architecture magic again, otherwise they'll be stuck. AMD has some room on Ryzens, but they are hitting the same obstacle in general... Then the question is, can there even be anything done to dramatically increase IPC and whether x86/x64 is the limiting factor.





AlwaysHope said:


> Dramatically increasing IPC won't happen anymore with current silicon technology. I mean not much more room from 12nm to 1nm, considering how past generations have gone like from 45 >32 >22 >14>12 etc, Intel or AMD. We will have to wait for Quantum computing tech to be commercialized first imo before we see "dramatically increased IPC".



Only time can tell. Though I would like to point out that even 14nm to 10nm equates to (roughly) 30% smaller (given that these process nodes are mostly marketing numbers, and the specific details are far more in depth than what "nm" it is).

As for the speed of the architecture itself, I don't see why Intel or AMD can't develop one that's faster with currently existing technology. C2D was a radical change from Netburst, and significantly faster, yet early C2D chips and late Netburst chips were both 65nm. Smaller processes are good, but it's not the only thing that makes chips faster.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 8, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Building a mITX PC for a family member to be used almost exclusively for MMORPG and RPG. I will be passing the FuryX to the build so the GPU part is settled. The monitor I have in mind is a 32'' 1440p Samsung one. Now it seems the most difficult part is deciding between 2700X and 8700K. So here are the specs I have in mind:
> 
> CPU: 2700X or 8700K
> MoBo: Z370-ITX or B450-ITX
> ...


My 2 cents; for gaming, the 8700k is the right choice for the best performance. However, the 2700x is a bad ass CPU for just about anything else and is within a few percent of the 8700k in gaming until you overclock. If you want the best performance in gaming and you are willing to overclock then the 8700k is the clear choice.


----------



## AlwaysHope (Sep 9, 2018)

hat said:


> Only time can tell. Though I would like to point out that even 14nm to 10nm equates to (roughly) 30% smaller (given that these process nodes are mostly marketing numbers, and the specific details are far more in depth than what "nm" it is).
> 
> As for the speed of the architecture itself, I don't see why Intel or AMD can't develop one that's faster with currently existing technology. C2D was a radical change from Netburst, and significantly faster, yet early C2D chips and late Netburst chips were both 65nm. Smaller processes are good, but it's not the only thing that makes chips faster.




There's a difference between "significantly faster" & "faster". But yeah, I hope AMD can do it. If rumors circulating around net are true, then 7nm for AMD gives 15% increase in IPC. BUT only rumors...


----------



## hat (Sep 9, 2018)

As do I. As far as these rumors, a 15% increase in IPC would probably put AMD a little bit _ahead_ of Intel, if they could reach the same clockspeeds... as of now though it's a wash and we can only hope.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Sep 9, 2018)

lol what's with the recent flood of fools retorting people's purchase choices with this adoretv person's propaganda vieos ? he did the best thing possible for his family member. I just wonder if people like this always hold themselves to such a standard. Do you research every product you buy not according to what you get for the price, but review the history of the company too ?
He purchased 2990wx system for himself, I can't imagine the ego of a person that's making him feel bad about buying someone 8700k for gaming sytem.Go troll for AMDored TV somewhere else.



AlwaysHope said:


> Dramatically increasing IPC won't happen anymore with current silicon technology. I mean not much more room from 12nm to 1nm, considering how past generations have gone like from 45 >32 >22 >14>12 etc, Intel or AMD. We will have to wait for Quantum computing tech to be commercialized first imo before we see "dramatically increased IPC".


Dude,you don't unedrstand die shrinks.28nm to 16nm is not the same as 12nm to 1nm.


----------



## Vlada011 (Sep 15, 2018)

Now arrive Intel's Ryzen killer. 
If I saw good default Cinebench i9-9900K is 2166.
2700X is arround 1800 score....

That mean i9-9900K default is faster and after overclocking both processors probably faster than i7-6950X 10 cores on 4.4GHz.
i7-6950X can't be find below 700$ used... And his price will drop on below 500$ instantly when i9-9900K show up.

I'm not sure that even new AMD with 8 core can beat i9-9900K.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 15, 2018)

Vlada011 said:


> Now arrive Intel's Ryzen killer.
> If I saw good default Cinebench i9-9900K is 2166.
> 2700X is arround 1800 score....
> 
> ...



Zzzzzzzzzzz

/thread


----------



## Vlada011 (Sep 15, 2018)

newtekie1 said:


> No it doesn't. Each chipset has always supported 2 generations. It has been this way with Intel for like a decade now.



i9-9900K will work on Z370.
And anyone who ask about 2700X and i7-8700K should wait and buy faster not slower CPU than 2700X.
Price difference between i7-8700K and i9-9900K should be arround 130-140 euro.

For 130-140 euro less you get CPU weaker than 2700X or CPU faster than i7-6950X and after mid OC.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Sep 15, 2018)

Vlada011 said:


> Now arrive Intel's Ryzen killer.


How much again? Oh that's right as much a used 7900x, What a joke.



Vlada011 said:


> i7-6950X can't be find below 700$ used


Bull, here in the UK it's £440 at cex, the 6950x is outdated by x299, hence the lower price.


----------



## Mighty-Lu-Bu (Sep 18, 2018)

The 2700X is superior to the 8700k- some will tell you other wise, but it isn't true. Currently the 8700k is more expensive (only slightly), it has a faster clock and slightly faster single core performance. The Ryzen 2700x decimates it in multi-core performance and since that's the way the industry is going, you can future proof your system so to speak. The 2800X is rumored to drop soon, but it most likely will be released after the i7-9700k.


----------

