add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

i5 8600k or Ryzen 1600x?

ReverseFlash

21 months ago

I was just curious Ive heard mixed results

Comments

  • 21 months ago
  • 1 point

Depends what they are used for. Gaming wise the 8600K will rule. Extra threads on the 1600x will beat out the 8600k with productivity work.

  • 21 months ago
  • 1 point

The i5-8600K would lead on the most productivity applications as well. ;)

  • 21 months ago
  • 1 point

Thx for answer!

  • 21 months ago
  • 2 points

Interesting... synthetic benchmarks must not show the whole picture as it showed 1600x a little ahead.

Thanks for the info.

  • 21 months ago
  • 2 points

If you see under the productivity benchmarks, the i5-8600K should perform faster on the most tests.

This was the main reason, why i posted the link to the benchmarks. ;)

  • 21 months ago
  • 1 point

This is what I've heard thx!

  • 21 months ago
  • 1 point

Get the 1600X for having a future proof platform to build at.

Or even better, wait for the new Ryzen 2000 series CPUs. ;)

  • 21 months ago
  • 1 point

Awesome thx!

  • 21 months ago
  • 1 point

No problem ;)

  • 21 months ago
  • 1 point

Yeah, I agree with Mark. As of this reply, the ryzen 2 cpus launch this week, I believe.

  • 21 months ago
  • 1 point

Hard to beat the 8600k running at a smooth 5Ghz on all 6 cores. Both good options but I do love my 8600k. Have fun

  • 21 months ago
  • 1 point

Hard to compare as they do not share equal implementation costs. In a stock-clock-vs-stock-clock setup, the 8600K is going to be ~$60 more to implement. There's no real point overclocking the 1600X, so if we compare it to an overclocked 8600K, the implementation cost of the 8600K can be upwards of ~$100 more than the 1600X. Stock vs Stock, they trade blows depending on workload, with the 8600K leading in real-time workloads like gaming. When we overclock the 8600K, it will match or beat the 1600X in almost all workloads.

The cost to implement a stock clocked 8600K is closer to that of implementing a Ryzen 7 1700, while the cost to implement an overclocked 8600K is more in the realm of implementing a 1700X. In either comparison, the 8600K holds the lead for real-time workload performance and lightly threaded workload performance, while the Ryzen 7 pulls ahead in heavily threaded workloads.

[comment deleted by staff]
  • 21 months ago
  • 1 point

Awesome!

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube