R7 1700 & i7-7700K for 144Hz Gaming at 1440p, 1080p, 4K

[@GamersNexus]

You might also like our Threadripper contact area showcase: kzbin.info/www/bejne/h6HZeIyulrJ_mZI Patrick's article: www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3009-amd-r7-1700-vs-i7-7700k-144hz-gaming

[@GamersNexus]

"Standard" implies baseline -- it is always 16:9 unless we otherwise specify.

[@ericneo2]

Could you test virtual machine performance on each?

[@Leli196]

@Antonio Osante This is nothing uncommon in statistics and mathematically correct. Good example: birthrate is also declared with one or two decimal places as it is the correct mathematical value. So no, it is not incorrect when you make a poplation projection with decimal points if that is the correct mathematical result.

[@GamersNexus]

We're averaging multiple test passes.

[@EaveeDoesIt]

So gaming at 1440p 144hz, but also streaming, would 1700 OC be better or would it come down to 1700 better for stream viewers while 7700k better for myself, but slightly worse for viewers?

[@WereCatStudio]

I don't understand... should I get Apple or NVIDIA?

[@WereCatStudio]

But I already have my Android chair....

[@d4n93r]

Download some more SDDR6 RAM and youre good to go

[@madpistol]

You can eat an Apple... you can't eat an Nvidia. The choice is simple.

[@Pekiii92]

If you eat an Apple, it will eventually turn into shit 🤔

[@WereCatStudio]

I don't like to eat Apple. Especially not in this hot summer. I would rather drink some nice AMD coffee since they always release their products late and I really love Laté.

[@J0cK3rFr3aK]

I don't know why man but you deliver the stuff I always wanted to see (teardowns with measurements, maintenance, experiments like the cooler for TR) and I can't help but smile when I see a new release because I know I will enjoy it. Thanks for that. Greetings from Germany.

[@GamersNexus]

Greetings! Thanks for watching!

[@GurtTarctor]

Both great CPUs. Though it's such a shame the 7700k has the TIM thermal flaw, otherwise I would recommend it to people more easily. Please sort it out for Coffee Lake Intel......

[@leexgx]

Posts that are blocked are annoying (if youtube is going to block and hide them at least remove the post count number

[@Zegidroph]

Every release you give like this gives me more respect for this channel. Thanks GN.

[@David-rq9dl]

Good thing that since the release of Ryzen 99% of people are game streamers or content creators

[@blufoxful]

David Wielander Hahah indeed this is the greatest benchmark i have ever seen. Some may like watching how their cpu perform in cinebench daily basis

[@railshot888]

David Wielander good thing Since release of Ryzen that 99% of the users are pure 100% gamers.

[@RahuKado]

I noticed that too! haha

[@dutchdykefinger]

Good thing that since the release of Ryzen 99% of the Intel fanboys are running out of good arguments ;)

[@blufoxful]

Alexander Rewijk Results are up there pretty much explain what is what at the moment. I dont stream or do cpu benchmark and satisfy myself if thats what you are looking for. Rocking with 7700k 5Ghz with only 1.3v. I can achieve 140-150fps range with this cpu easily which is pretty much why i purchased.

[@1breadbox]

Was looking EVERYWHERE for a video like this. Thanks guys!

[@SKRlTY]

As always good video, but the comments are pure cancer.

[@thebook5458]

if u do biased shit comments get cancerous ..

[@w4cky7]

Thank you for testing 1440p 144 Hz. So many tests I've looked at that only really do 1080. Nice to see what it's actually like.

[@Tcflohr]

My 1700 does fine for 144hz 1440p, but I am using gsync with a 1080 so it's a fine experience. No complaints.

[@parsastrife6629]

It's really nice to see Dota 2 tested here. Especially with 1% and 0.1% lows! I think it's the first time someone has done that and I'm surprised that even the i7 gets such a low %0.1 low. Thanks a lot for testing this title! You're the first to do this

[@ahsankarim4012]

The production quality on this channel is unmatched. The wall is so nice combined with that blue table @_@

[@Motolav]

Ahsan Karim the "Blue Table" is just an antistatic mat on a dark table

[@shinjiikari4629]

I'd say his hair is unmatched as well. Love to see other tech youtubers like Linus, Jayz or Tech deals rocking long hair tho

[@shiks98]

Man watching a GN video after a month, realized how much I missed the thoughtfulness that went into your content creation!

[@andreipelle6205]

Wow frametimes in DOTA 2 are absoluetly horrible for both the 7700k and the r7 1700. That's "optimisation" for you.

[@JONNYGEEKMANG]

Intro looks 4k and 3d even at 144p. Goodwork sir.

[@XxASBURYxX]

Was only 6 months ago I could not stand Gamers Nexus, have to admit you guys have been pushing some brilliant content lately, and has easily made me change my thoughts on you guys :D

[@FrankieHiltz]

I think I'd still pick the 1700. Because if you ever want to get into streaming, making videos, or ANYTHING work related, your 7700k is the absolute end of the line unless you wanna get a new board and pay 1,000$ for an upgrade. The 1700 on the other hand, the platform will use the socket for 3 years at least. So you could upgrade in the next generation, or even the gen passed that if that's how long AMD wants to use it. The 7700k though.. Yes, it's great for gaming, but you're at the end of your line. If filling that gap between 120fps and 180fps is your thing, then I guess you'll be just fine, but there are just so many day to day tasks that massively benefit from the raw threading power. Besides, a 1700 setup is still much cheaper with motherboard choice + cpu cooler in mind. Either way, I don't think anyone could go wrong with either. Everyone uses computers differently, and now there isn't a ridiculous price jump for insane threading capabilities, which is great imo.

[@LoveNoThotss]

well yeah, intel makes no sense to purchase for anyone who does more than strictly gaming unlessy you're willing to buy their extreme lineup cpu's. it's that simple. I enjoy using intel and i love the snappy feel of it's single core performance when im not heavily multitasking, but when i do oh boy do i miss amd. Thats why i have an i7 1700 here chilling and im handing down my intel rig to a buddy.

[@DanielRichards644]

I was hoping someone would revisit this, seeing how much Ryzen has improved since launch, we needed some updated benchmarks

[@AsyZaCo]

I'm getting 150fps average at 1440p in Dota 2 on a 1070/R7 1700. I don't know why your fps is so low. Are you testing in borderless window?

[@BigEightiesNewWave]

Emanuel Cardoso agree.

[@Synthematix]

this is why benchmarks are useless bullshit everyones computer s different

[@abang02]

Compare your comp specs to their test bench

[@JustBenching]

@Harry Fordham I'm usually getting way more than 150. I'm about between 170-200, and at 200 my 1060 is bottlenecking me. Though I have my R5 1600 overclock to 3.9 with 3200C16 ram, but still, 107 is way too freaking low. Even my fx 8350 was doing better than that.

[@JustBenching]

You do realize you called us AMD bots because we have different results from his benchmark? This benchmark is definitely wrong, both on the Ryzen and on the i7. My brother's 4790k does better than an oc'ed 7700k, according to this bench

[@rustyredbeard]

The shot of the CPU laid flat, 'pins up', revolving as the light glints through, is so beautiful it's hard to concentrate on what you are saying at that point.

[@ktorange4172]

This test is pointless the human eye can't see more than 0.1 feet per second

[@mattdicicco8903]

This is EXACTLY the type of video I wanted

[@bmcginnis6543]

I just scored a 1700 and an Asus Prime b350m-a for $302 total shipped with tax. Still $30 cheaper than just the 7700k.

[@TCBYEAHCUZ]

Weird thing is that the 7700k is cheaper than the 1700 for me lol

[@dassneaker]

Good for you. Get 3200mhz ram and make some tests yourself. 1700 results in this video are fucking ridiculous

[@Synthematix]

not in 6 months time it wont be when games can actually use all the power of the ryzen

[@Synthematix]

Its not just about core count m8, there are hell of lot of variables involved, if the ryzen multitasks better which it does, then it can game better once developers get their fingers out their asses. but i rarely game i bought the ryzen7 for multitasking and my radio station, its a monster performer, also screw artificial bs benhmarks, they dont mean shit.

[@Synthematix]

mate that 8700k cpu is nearly twice the price for a 5 to 7fps increase in games, at that ratio the ryzen is twice as fast

[@KahlDragonborn]

This was a Great video thank you for showing it!!! I think most people have the 1700 or the 7700k and it kind of feels like alot of people stoped doing much content with them, there just doing videos of threadripper and X cpu's.

[@phillipwise940]

To be honest I don't think I would buy Intel products full stop, they don't care about there customers, the industry or the future of technology.

[@kippers12isOG]

I love you Steve. Thanks to all the team at gamers nexus, I cannot get enough of the content at the moment 😍😍😍

[@bmcginnis6543]

I can't imagine anyone buying a 7700k and a z170/z270 board today. Knowing the platform is dead and there will be zero upgrades coming later. It's pretty obvious 4 core processors are going the way of the dinosaur.

[@noobplebdeluxe4426]

Patrick zen 2 is going to be on am4

[@Erowens98]

am4 is going to stick around for the next 3 generations. I will be able to use this motherboard with my Zen 3 cpu.

[@vespaman101]

Patrick nope am4 won't go away until 2021. So you can justify buying a 150 to 250 dollar motherboard. It'll be upgradeable for years.

[@FOXc09]

I am about to buy 7700k and z270, Imagine that.

[@-caesar3751]

Eblouie Par La Nuit nice!

[@Fubo777]

Great video! Are you going to do more streaming tests between these CPUs? Would be intresting to see r7 1700/1800x with x264 vs i7 7700k with NVENC, and see how well they hold over 60fps in CPU heavy titles(like GTA 5 for example), GPU heavy titles (maybe crysis 3), and competitive multiplayer games (like dota2, csgo, pubg, overwatch). The NVENC might require some fiddling to get the best performance (like disabling shadowplay recording, not using rescale feature on the "output" tab in OBS)

[@madpistol]

Time to light the internet on fire. If you're a framerate nut and only care about absolute performance in games, get the 7700k. If you're a multi-tasker and thinking about keeping your CPU for a long time, the R7 1700 will probably end up being faster in the long run. Overall, they're great CPUs. If I didn't already have an i7 4790k, I would get the R7 1700.

[@M3pheston]

To me, a big takeaway from this as well as basically every other AMD vs Intel comparisons is that AMD finally has a CPU that's able to play ball. One has to remember the huge disparity AMD let fester for way too long due to it's sub-optimal architecture. I'm just happy that there's some competition in the market again, no matter what side you are fan of, healthy competition is good for the entire market.

[@thedarknightnicht]

Lets say if you play at any resolution 60Hz then in gaming neither CPU makes a difference

[@AtomicAJ74]

Thanks for the hard work (was that really work?) and the great info. Video was great!

[@skitballesnorapa]

Good content, great hair, dank meme.

[@AlexComanM]

@Steve, don't know if you'll see this, but it would be really nice, instead of saying "Blender animations" or "Blender rendering", to just say CGI, or 3D animations or rendering. The Blender program is not the only 3d program out there. I know that you guys use it, but it might confuse new people that are entering the field. Great content btw!

[@peterkappler3578]

LoL dont bring PC in my nerd sphere!!

[@2ndLastJedi]

Looks like i should upgrade from i5 6600k to i7 7700k for 4k and keep my z170?

[@johndoe-gw6tj]

that's joke right......that'd be a waste of money for 4k

[@metamancer2775]

Be sure to update to a BIOS that supports Kaby lake before upgrading

[@aaronbigleman7326]

2ndLastJedi 4K is basically all GPU limited at this point. Even the 1080Ti struggles to keep 60fps in newer games.

[@2ndLastJedi]

Really ? My 1080ti is at 85% and 6600k 100% in WD2 an BF1 so just thought could get more FPS by upgrading to 7700k instead of a full chipset change.

[@2ndLastJedi]

@john doe Why? Didht you guys watch this vid ? Not one game was struggling @ 4k with 7700k but my 6600k certainly is!

[@Rumi_117]

great video, I love these comparisons so much 2 excellent cpu's each for different users, I love having choice :D

[@MegadolonProductions]

1600 and use the 150 you save for a better gpu.. it's that easy :D

[@ivand5699]

MegadolonProductions that's for budget gamers, 144 hz is not budget and for that you need a 7700k at 4.9Ghz.

[@MegadolonProductions]

GP Patrol yeah obviously it doesn't but if you wanna go full pro with fps at competetive games you probably know what cpu (7700k OBVIOUSLY) fits you the best anyway, for the general consumer it's the best thing to do for 1080p ultra or 1440p

[@benbai5808]

did you watch the video no you do not need a 7700k @ 4.9 for all games at 144hz. Hell, in many gpu bound games a 7700k at stock gives the same framerate as an OC'ed 7700k

[@franciscogarcia86]

Ivan D I'm gaming on a 1440p/144Hz monitor with an i5-6600K without problems. The 7700K is not a must!

[@MrDutch1e]

N be bottlenecked and have stutter when ur minimums drop in a bunch if games. Ya totally make sense to buy a faster gpu that will perform worse then if u bought the 7700k and a slower gpu lol.

[@ZeroB4NG]

feeling confirmed in my purchase decision... 7700K for 1080p 144Hz, and i'm sure the gap at higher resolutions will grow as faster GPUs become available over the next few years as well. The overclocking results though... a bit disappointing... expected to see more of a gap so close to 5GHz.

[@plsmuteyou]

funny thing is since the Ryzen release every Intel fanboy claim to have enough money to buy a 7700k where in fact most PC builds are with a I5 lmao

[@frshunter]

Thanks Steve good job as always!

[@VirtualFunction]

7700k is better for single-thread performance/IPC, in other news water is wet :P

[@benbai5808]

IPC is different actually zen is around ivy bridge performace so about 10-20% more performance per clock for kaby lake compared to zen

[@james2042]

A Lamp broadwell. Not ivy. And it's largely due to the infinity fabric, and proof is the skylake x also uses a fabric and runs right around the same fps as ryzen. (Normal skylake and kabylake do not for reference)

[@Saki630]

you totally dont get the reason for this video

[@benbai5808]

James Mastroianni I would say broadwell with fast ram but without the fast ram it's ivy for sure. Look up the i7 3770 v r5 1500x and you can see they're basically the same bc of the slight clock difference

[@vikingvrede7286]

VirtualFunction Water sure can be wet!

[@zpa5649]

The 7700k is meant for gamers, the 1700 is meant for producers. Why the hell are we still having this argument? Like dudes, you're watching a video from gamers for gamers. I'll enjoy my 1700 in productivity land and the rest can enjoy their huge clock speeds and IPC gains in game land while I enjoy my multicore performance for applications that feed off of multicore performance.

[@XseuguhX]

I would love to see a "realistic setup" test, with all kinds of programs running in the background. Like for example, while the game is running -> a few tabs of a web browser opened, maybe a youtube video playback -> a podcast/music player app -> an antivirus -> OneDrive or equivalent -> Discord or equivalent -> a task manager window You get the idea. Would more cores help? Or maybe it wouldn't have much impact? Either way, that would be very interesting.

[@stinger15au]

XseuguhX this is exactly the kind of scenario the 1700 will crush over the 7700k. 20% performance hit id guess

[@spaghettigod43]

stinger15au And this is a scenario that I am always in

[@user-td3uj8is5i]

Not realistic scenario

[@XseuguhX]

I actually listed everything I had open while writing the comment, I can't be the only one :)

[@RacermonGaming]

my daily things that are open are Control Panel, Steam, Notepad++ Hwmonitor Msi Afterburner Too many tabs of chrome (like 10gb of chrome) Paint and Windows Explorer Rivatuner is also running in the background, along with a antivirus of some sort, then I commonly have a game open in the background with a recording software open too sooooo I am guessing Ryzen is my best bet

[@Xerangelo]

This man is asking the right questions. 4K doesn't matter yet, High refresh rate at 1080p+ is the sweet spot.

[@L2Xenta]

This actually means, youre fine if you already have a 7700K , however to buy one now you must be really fricking drunk. Ok it may look good on certain high fps "competitive" games of present, but the future is all about more cores. If you care about future games and future applications, you need them cores. And at this moment , price to performance, 1700 looks really good.

[@RamiroASandoval]

I kinda agree but there is not "future proofing" in technology :(

[@johntotten4872]

Hence why I will buy the Coffee lake 6c12t Cpu coming out in a few months. Multi alot like a r7 1700 and gaming like a 7700k.

[@spaghettigod43]

John Totten Then buy Zen 2 it'll have better ipc and higher clocks

[@FlorianNoP]

+John Totten I am also looking forward to Coffee Lake or Zen 2 but honestly, I doubt that the 8700k will be faster than the 7700k in gaming. Clocks might be lower, TDP higher and their new mesh bus seems to be worse than their ring bus that they still use in the 7700k so I wouldn't say that the 8700k will be the all in one wonder. Look at skylake x all of these higher core count chip loose in gaming against the 7700k. Seems like they peaked in gaming performance with kaby lake.

[@L2Xenta]

my final goal will be Zen 7nm architecture, whatever it will be called, zen 2 or 3, but in present there are not many options in my opinion , im 85% sure ill get a Ryzen 1700 after Coffee lake launch , just waiting to see what Intel can deliver price-to-performance. But I doubt they can compete at this moment with AMD's offer, and I also doubt that 6core coffee lake will be a huge improvement overall compared to 7700K. But we will see when tons of benchmarks pop-up. P.s. I think Ryzen 1700 can keep me going for at least 2 years, with a very good graphics card that is. There also im waiting to see if Vega 56 is worth it... how it overclocks, or miners will fuck us over again. I dont think I can afford a 1080ti so... that's my concern right now not the CPUs , I think R5 1700 will do just fine... I hate Overwatch anyway, cant stand it.

[@chickenbeforeegg]

I've been an Intel guy all my life, but seeing how anything north of 80-100 FPS doesn't matter much to me, the less expensive pricepoint of the 1700 PLUS the proven better performance for streaming tells me it'll be my next choice when upgrading. 7700k rocks, don't get me wrong, but it's potential downfalls aren't worth paying more and have negligible differences in frames you most certainly won't notice or care about. Just IMO.

[@mGoodbar82]

Honestly with those frames from both cpus, the only way you'll tell the difference is if you play with an fps counter while gaming. Other than that I doubt you'd be able to tell the difference.

[@randalllawkin]

Great video so glad you made it

[@eonizen]

These tests need some sanity check data added to them with the RX470 and 1050Ti or RX480 and 1060. Otherwise they can very easily lead non-techies into assuming all the wrong things. All channels do the same mistake. Then people assume the difference is going to be the same at all levels. Takes time and work to explain to your friends that the RX470 won't that much % slower slower on the 1700 vs the 7700K because the difference was big with a 1080Ti.

[@buzzluxx1042]

Please do a revisit in a couple years! Will be very interesting to see how they each hold up.

[@shung1te]

How you get 144hz 4K monitor do you work with acer

[@sashakiselev8456]

Saltysaltman it is probably custom resolution. Super sample a game to 4K on a 1440p144hz monitor

[@m0rtl]

Nope. Just a 4k monitor without any fps cap enabled

[@sashakiselev8456]

mortl same idea

[@shung1te]

You can get a 4K 144hz monitor from acer soon

[@af-s]

Just use a normal 4K screen, being 144hz or not won't affect the max fps you can achieve.

[@muskyelondragon]

Good testing, as I play DDO while Firefox is open in the background and I am running 10 threads of Einstein At Home on my R5 1600x. 😎

[@sanmattew7221]

If you are simply a gamer then the i7 7700k is definitely a better choice for the price.

[@worldkat1393]

Not where I live, 1700 costs 370 USD and 7700k is 520 USD. Not even remotely worth it for the offered gains.

[@Mikkel94]

both cost around 2500 dkk in Denmark

[@dutchdykefinger]

no point in paying 350 bucks for it now though, seeing as coffee lake will most likely cannibalize kaby lake in a couple of months. i'd take the upgrade path over intel's money grabs any day myself.

[@Patttiat]

fanboy detected @ barondorado there is no better cpu, both do well for the right task. gaming + streaming or recording? go with the amd cpu only gaming on high end? go with intel and sli/crossfire support on the 1700 cpu sucks hard, where the intel cpu do better.

[@jeffreyz4632]

Patttiat patttiat2000 How many people actually use crossfire/sli? Not a lot. Not that many games support it, and you're better off with a better single GPU.

[@CoquiAudio]

I love the DVI adapter as a model holding the cpu so cute ^_^

[@wildbeerus818]

in gta v, you'll have to pray so ryzen might get 60 FPS somehow

[@yuihirasawao9]

Noobie Gamer ur thumbnail with this comment 😂😂😂

[@wildbeerus818]

actually it's profile picture or avatar xD

[@epicenter713]

I'm interested to see how memory speed and latency on the R7 1700's side play into this. Are you considering doing a video showing Ryzen performance scaling in and outside of games with different memory configurations? Since the latest AGESA update, not much information is out about how performance scales approaching 4000 MHz, or if that's achievable on some Ryzen CPUs. Thanks for the great video!

[@geronimo5559]

Thank you not being a fanboy.

[@chosenundead3174]

Right? holy shit. You can't say the truth "The 7700k é the best cpu for gamers" on the internet anymore. I can hear the butthurt already.

[@youtuberobbedmeofmyname]

Gamers Nexus has intel bias. Don't even waste your time trying to tell me otherwise, youtubers like AdoredTV already proved it.

[@theonetruelenny9883]

dxfxct AMDoredTV? Lmfao.

[@zabdi786]

I appreciate the extra effort you went through in order to come off as "politically correct" and not trying to rub fanboys the wrong way.

[@TBCool]

I game, Skype/discord, and often have a browser open for music or a video going depending on the game. The 1700 clearly fits my work case better and personally I feel this is the norm for most online gamers.

[@GamersNexus]

Skype and Discord aren't going to impact your performance noticeably. If they are, something else is very wrong. The 1700 better fits actual productivity scenarios. Skype, Discord, and music playback are not part of that. They are trivial applications to run.

[@woeiruty123]

T B that has to be a joke right?

[@TBCool]

Woeiruty Perhaps I should clarify I skype with cam on. But cool thanks for the info. Still seems the video watching counts though?

[@TBCool]

Peter LeMarc whoa, what a assumption. I never said I only game. I simply said that was what I do as I game. Chill out bro.

[@inyue.]

No and no lol

[@ElimRawne]

Gamers Nexus is da Star of da Shorez!

[@Mikkel94]

7700k still tearing the 1700 ass apart in gaming. no point in going for the 1700 for gaming either get a 1600 (non x) or a 7700k if gaming is all that you're doing.

[@niiro_o]

Dharkos but who the hell only plays games on their computer lol

[@Mikkel94]

most people? the amount of people streaming vs gaming is likely 1:10.000

[@aviroblox6624]

Quite a few people only need a strong processor like the i7 7700k for gaming. Do you really think everyone streams and edit videos all of the sudden? Most people just game and, productivity wise, use word processors, excel, etc.

[@constantin58]

This is true only for the low end gamer who plays on 1080p. 2k and 4k are almost a tie for this processors. Multi thread / multitasking on 1700 makes it even a better future proof cpu.

[@theman19327]

"Future proofing" isn't really worth thinking about - but it is true that the 1700 will multitask better, if you do that often, it's worth considering aiming for more cores/threads.

[@hamilpatel4025]

thorough, as always.

[@milosnikolic7867]

Games are optimized for intel, if new games are somewhat optimized for ryzen too can we see ryzen beating intel with higher thread count?

[@_____alyptic]

I'm getting a Ryzen like rn but i'm concerned about this statement applying to 8-cores....8 as opposed to 2 or 4 Maybe if it was 6 but you never know I hear optimisation is starting to kick in now

[@D87468]

It's sad that there is still no word about the lifespan of the processor. 7700K squeezed out like a lemon, with its load in games. Whereas 1700 rests on half of the cores. Reminds recommendations about i5 & and i3 as "the best game processors", some time ago.

[@MarcAntoine01]

I legit have a 7700k with 144Hz 1080p screen. Also having a 1080Ti and I'm trying to find the best upgrade I can get. I'm thinking about the 7820X or the 1700.. This test couldn't be more suited for my needs, cheers from France :)

[@soulshot96]

I mean, if you mainly play games on that screen, then no upgrades are a good idea. Everything is going to run games worse overall...I hope that is the conclusion you've came to with this video lol.

[@SuperBeautifulNoise]

How about a Threadripper 1900X?

[@konstantinos2068]

get a 1440p 144hz gsync monitor... theres no need to upgrade such a combo if you want to upgrade so bad, get an 8700k when it comes out

[@obese7027]

I think 1900x will be worse at gaming than r7 1700, because it's basically two 1500x in one package. If it can use both dies on game, the latencies will be really high and impact the framerates. If it can use only one die on game, it will be like 1500x at best case scenario.

[@silverwerewolf975]

Dat idiot you are

[@EternalSilence1]

Thank god they included graphs.

[@PeterNjeim]

AMD Ryzen 5 1600 still ties the intel Core i7-7800X in gaming so I don't really care about this, lol. Watch _Hardware Unboxed's_ video on this subject for more information.

[@soulshot96]

7800x and the 7900x lose to the 7700k in gaming, in most situations...so using them for comparison is fucking stupid, or deliberately misleading.

[@alexandrebony6221]

I don't really care about your opinion.

[@GamersNexus]

The 7800X and 7900X aren't comparable to the 7700K in this type of task. Just like Threadripper won't be to the 1700 in the same type of task. The value proposition doesn't make sense because that's not what they're for.

[@thelittledetailscr7231]

Peter Njeim Most people don't edit video they game. 7700k is the best gaming cpu.

[@no-defun-allowed]

Jimmakos OiOi never listened to music, watched a movie, or really done anything as well as play a game? That ties up the CPU. I have a 1600 and it's much better at parallelism than my old i5 6400.

[@kitsone4222]

A shot every time Steve says "seven"...go!

[@3rdGenGuy]

My issue with the 1700 is how long it will last in a build if it's a bottleneck at 1080p, soon it will be an issue at 1440P, or 4k GPUs are jumping in performance at a fast pace with 4k 144hz being a thing now, ryzen will be an issue in 2-3 years the 1700 might end up being the difference between 40fps and 60fps

[@stinger15au]

Id argue its the opposite. With 8cores becoming mainstream. Developers will be moving to take advantage. In 3 years the 4core 7700k will just get worse and worse. Its going to be a long time until a 1700 is a bottleneck at 4k, so much time it will be time for a new processor

[@saladwithsalad]

It's not a bottleneck you inbred,the cpu usage is below 60-70%.

[@phoenixtheraver]

its not a bottleneck, a 1700 @ 3.9ghz can handle 2 x GTX TiTan Xp's in SLI without bottlenecking the CPU

[@phoenixtheraver]

Stinger15au That's accurate. What many gamer fail miserably to realize is that games in the final quarter of 2017 and first quarter of 2018 are going to be optimized to take full advantage of all the threads the CPU has to offer to bring better performance. BF1 is the first of its kind. You need 4 cores to run it, but need 6 threads to max it out. Thats why people who play BF1 with 4c/4t Cpu's are pegged at 100% the whole time.

[@TRX25EX]

phoenixtheraver Prove it, developers said we are working on it, but they also said most gamers have 4 cores and less than more than 4, also its time consuming to make games optimised for 8 cores, also they said it might take 2 years to take advantage of extra cores cause they are not benchmark type of games like AOS, they will move with Intel mainstream which is hghest selling, so next year or after 2 years 6 cores will be the most games utilization, currently 7700K most selling followed by 1600 and 7600K, so why developer will work on 8 cores? Also if they do work on 8 cores the Intel Skylake X will shine due to its clockspeeds advantages...... So no matter what for gaming always will be Intel best, value is something personal, I value things different than you or him or that guy.....

[@hexcrown2416]

Going to be picking up one of those Asus 3440x1440 175hz ultra wide monitors coming out later this year, glad I went with the 7700k.

[@smashallpots1428]

honestly a few frames shy really isnt a big deal when you have fps that high

[@choatus]

50 or so frames is not a few...

[@kurosumomo]

GP Patrol, I can't see how having more than 144 frames in CS:GO could matter. The "have to have more frames every day" just stuck with CS from Quake days, where the engine actually calculated physics differently depending on how much Hz you reach, which is not a thing anymore since 1999. Playing CS:GO on 120, 300 or 500+ Hz makes no difference at all, no matter what anyone says, but this trend will continue and if CS:GO remain popular for the next few years, the next target will be 2000Hz in CS:GO or it is unplayable. I'd say 144Hz should be the target for everyone for silky smooth gaming, anything more is just useless frames in the big picture.

[@mitzio948]

奥村 麻子 did u try 240hz? If the answer is no, then u should stfu (

[@metamancer2775]

30% is a lot

[@DeadAimKillah]

Idiots, he meant that if the 7700k had 220 average and 150 lows, the 1700 had 170 average and 140 lows, you wouldn't be able to tell on a 144Hz panel (a 240 maybe). there is no real "winner" here is what gamers nexus was getting at unless you don't like the small variables of it dropping below your refresh rate. CPU demanding titles will be able to play a higher framerates on the 7700k but most play at higher refresh rates on esports titles showing you don't need as much horsepower as you thought for most of those titles.

[@sugarskullgaming6739]

Great video! Just bought 1440p 144hz acer monitor. Now to get a 1080ti

[@halistinejenkins5289]

that four core is a beast...

[@saladwithsalad]

Not really .Intel has been holding the market for 10 years,while pushing only quad cores .So it's natural that games are optimized for 4 cores.The only reason Ryzen is slower is because it can't clock to 4.5-5ghz.

[@halistinejenkins5289]

w/e mr future. that thing is ripping ryzen a new ass in games "presently" and that's where i live. enjoy your time travels.

[@saladwithsalad]

Whatever helps you sleep at night,mr. present.Just don't burst your bubble ;)

[@halistinejenkins5289]

cool thanks

[@Outroduce1]

Intel pushed 4-cores only because AMD was busy being stuck in stone age. Now thanks thanks to Ryzen, AMD forced Intel to make more radical moves like 4c/8t i3s in Coffe Lake.

[@GoochQuest]

That 1080ti b-roll was beautiful.

[@hr0thgar_]

Would love to know the bench results for overwatch on the low preset for 1080p.

[@GamersNexus]

You'd hit the frame cap.

[@DeathComposor]

Can confirm you hit the frame cap at 2k with low presets on a single 1080ti.

[@ODIOPOWER]

yes, 300fps in any situation. I play it on low with a 1080ti. When streaming with my 5820k@4.5ghz sometimes it dip below. i need a better pc ://

[@ODIOPOWER]

i also have a 240hz monitor.

[@Kofoedsan]

Clock speed is still king in gaming I see. Hopefully future games will be able to take advantage of all of the cores of Rhyzen and maybe Threadripper - Would be interesting to see!

[@SWEbear021]

R7 1700 is a way better cpu anyway

[@thelittledetailscr7231]

björn sjöblom It is so far behind.

[@SWEbear021]

yaeh maybe for now but while 7700k uses like 99%the 1700 is at 30% so that cpu will work much longer time unthill u need to change cpu and soon they will us more cores better aswell:Peven intel will start with more cores in coffelake:Pbtw in real world u got like skype spotify game capturing afterburner and what ever program at the same time so then the advantage go away really fast:Pryzen is much better in everything else then gaming and who really needs like 230 fps insteed of 200-.-u will not be a pro in esport anyway and kids with a 750ti and 60 fps in cs or so will kill u anyway:P

[@SWEbear021]

1700 is like a 1000 cpu if u compare it to a 6900k-6950 but sure u rather get a a 6700k insteed of a 6900k if u could chose^^

[@GamersNexus]

This comment ignores the entire conclusion and intro of the video.

[@SWEbear021]

dont forget a 7700k beats a 7900x aswell;)intel logic when they ´try to justify ther shitty 7700k that intel say u shouldnt even OC xD

[@MrQko]

buying a quad core cpu is in 2017 is like buying a dual core in 2012

[@sapphie132]

This video makes me feel better about not having waited for Ryzen and having bought a 7600k instead

[@saladwithsalad]

Too bad your CPU will be pegged at 85-90% usage all the fucking time.After 1-2 years you will regret it.

[@BurainGTrailNFish]

Nice , but dude for me Ryzen is better buy and pair it up with 50$ mobo because im poor. I know i should get a job but im 12 yrs old so i should just pray for "jesus steve" to perform a miracle get me a cool PC. (ಥ ͜ʖಥ)

[@mistamisa7271]

Who gives a shit about CPU usage? I'll take my pegged i5-i7 with 10 more fps, thanks.

[@FilatAndrei]

@Momiji I too suck off a multi billion dollar publicly traded corporation and put people down for their choices.

[@TheJupiteL]

Mista Misa for now anyway, since we're moving towards more core = better.

[@veritas6936]

Power consumption under load would have been nice, but gr8 vid as always.

[@H1zN]

I have a 7700k (4.9GHz), Asus 1080Ti, 32GB of 3000MHz RAM and two 144Hz monitors [BenQ Zowie XL2730 (1440p) and a BenQ 2720Z (1080p)] - I Think, I did all right xD

[@Patttiat]

:-D

[@CaptDnaDonut]

That sounds really nice :D

[@thelittledetailscr7231]

Octanius Blue If you brag about having it, you probably don't. I enjoy my setup, but don't feel the need to tell the world.

[@EvilWiffles]

Someone is jelly. Still rocking my 4790k and see no need for upgrading yet.

[@andreww7732]

I have a Lenovo craptop hooked up to a small tv, all setup on top of a folding chair. How's that?

[@brumby92]

Did your intro graphic get prettier or is just me? Looks freakin great.

[@taipeitaiwan10]

I'm assuming butt hurt AMD fan boys are giving this video downvotes.

[@zmtryhard115]

taipeitaiwan10 what are these down votes you speak of? It seems like a pretty well received video to me.

[@taipeitaiwan10]

the numbers say Up: Down is 17:1 But why even downvote? What is wrong with this video that causes 38 downvotes? I just don't understand people.

[@braendo]

some people will always hate. I prefer AMD due to their buisness practises, but if i had to buy a cpu at the moment, it would probally be the 7700k, because i play at 144hz. Thats just a fact, nothing to be salty about. Many Amd fans will argue that these differences dont matter and that the ryzen is "future proof"etc, but that is mostly bullshit. Maybe this will chang with zen2. Luckily, i dont have to upgrade, because my i7 4770k is fine for now. Maybe coffee lake or zen 2 will be worth it for me

[@stinger15au]

Why would they? Everyone knows for pure 1080p gaming only the 7700k is best. But for every other scenario the 1700 is best. Some people genuinely only use their pc for gaming at 1080p and web browsing. The 7700k makes sense here. But lots and lots of people use their pcs for many tasks and game at 1440p+, here the 1700 makes far more sense.

[@taipeitaiwan10]

I play 1440p 144Hz so I needed CPU that is going to get max out of GPU...7700k does so. I don't edit/render videos so I had no use for 1700. But the 1700 is little cheaper than 7700k making it more desirable. As for AMD, I've owned their GPUs...but for now Nvidia is alone at higher end.

[@LazerFocus3113]

I really would like to see stock vs stock videos for both CPUs and GPUs. We all know 99% of people who buy the hardware do not OC so OC values as a standard are misleading.

[@yuihirasawao9]

Larry Smith im with u, i have a 6800k, a 240 aio and i dont oc lol - im not into it - current speed is more than enough for me - i dont like it "hot" - i like my stuff to last longer

[@Vartazian360]

This video can be summarized in 1 sentence: 5ghz 7700k vs 4ghz 1700 in gaming. 5.0 vs 4.0 is 25 % increase based on clock speed alone. Man i cant wait for zen2, with much higher clock speeds.

[@theshockbro]

Could you please do a test of streaming while gaming performance between R5 1600/1600x and R7 1700 please? Since you've already done amazing video on 1700 vs 7700k, there's no need to add intel in this comparison, I'd say. I can't find this comparison anywhere, and I'm just about to upgrade my outdated i5 3470, at the end of the month/beginning of September. Please help me out finalize my decision :) Love the channel, keep up the good work!

[@akabiscuitwaffle]

I don't think people get that the 7700K is slammed 100% during gaming to get those numbers. Where as half the 1700 is barely being used. That i7 has ZERO headroom in terms of performance left in it, and the R7 is just waiting around for future Vulcan/DX12 titles, that are properly optimized, to let it stretch its legs. There's a good 40% of the R7 not being utilized what so ever. 5 years from now when it's normal for titles to use 8 core CPUs like 4 cores are now, you'll see the 1700 playing games that the 7700K can't even boot because of minimum core count requirements. Course, lot of people are short sighted and don't care about having to build a new system every 2 years as long as they get the most performance they can for games made today. People buying core2duos and phenomX2s instead of core2quads and phenomX4s, or more accurately, 3.8Ghz hyper threaded Pentium 4s instead of core2quads.

[@vinnyonyt9964]

earliest i've ever been on this channel. so early there are no dislikes:D

[@DanielRichards644]

me too

[@TheScorpio32]

Thanks Steve, I'll just wait for coffee-lake then if it doesnt beat the i7-7700k in IPC, Im goin to wait for another year :D

[@rosssplawn4131]

You asked "does over 144 fps matter?" The answer is yes, for some people. It has been shown many times that the higher the fps the less input delay you get. And some people, usually pro gamers, but even people like me can easily feel the difference between the input lag at 144 fps and 300 fps.

[@mbe102]

Hey Gamers Nexus, just curious, but were the DOTA 2 benches done using Vulkan? I'd be interested to see the difference there, if not.

[@ChronoTriggers]

I already love this guy.

[@buzzluxx1042]

Did you manually overclock the ram on the 1700? Buildzoid has a great video showing that a lot of the default DDR4 XMP profiles were setting some of the sub timings double what they needed to be. By changing these sub timings he was able to get a 10% or more gain in synthetic CPU benchmarks. Just because ram shows fast speeds and low base latency does not mean it is working to its full potential.

[@cXnJohn]

The visibly bent pins at the 33 second mark trigger me XD

[@JONNYGEEKMANG]

If you want to game only, I would hold tight for Intels Coffe lake. They should have something different then before. 6 core mainstream at core i7 7700k prices. With another 3-8% ipc and similar clock speeds. That will be very good. Still going for zen2 or whatever the ryzen refresh is but whatever. Both teams have viable stuff now so get what you want for your usage.

[@khianidude]

For completion sake, it would be really fun to see the same results with 2 1080 Ti's in SLI. Yes, it's completely unnecessary since both CPUs can go over 60 Hz at 4k, but it would be really telling just how capable both CPUs are at their limits.

[@chasedown26]

Love the video. Just one question how many of your viewers have a 1080 ti... it might be more than i think. But i would guess most use a 1070 or lower just as best price to performance. and i guess i can see why you use it, in some cases even the 7700k didnt make the cut at 1440 ultra so a lower gpu might not have been able to even make the frames. I love the video though it helps show which games are demanding and in a few of them im left wishing amd had higher clocks cause then id think it really doesnt matter which one you get cause they would be so close lol.

[@BRUXXUS]

Kind of a bummer the 1700 falls behind in some of these game when it comes to high frame rate gaming, but I definitely do some streaming, rendering, editing, and other work with my computer so in the end I think AMD gets my business for my next build. It's pretty awesome to be able to say that.

[@stinger15au]

So pure 1080p gaming only. 7700k, every other scenario ryzen 1700

[@LoftySkinner]

The R7 1700 has known problems with Rocket League which is holding me back from buying one as it's my #1 most played game. Even my i5-3570K at 4.4Ghz doesn't dip below 144 FPS on 1440p with a 290x, outside of 1 map (Aqua Dome) which is capable of dipping to 120 FPS, thankfully I have Freesync on)