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

[Liviu Cojocaru]

Hi guys,

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

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

Thank you in advance for your respectable opinions

 

[londiste]

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

 

[JalleR]

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

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

 

[evernessince]

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

 

[Liviu Cojocaru]

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

 

[FYFI13]

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

 

[Liviu Cojocaru]

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

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

 

[qubit]

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

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

Oh and upgrade to an SSD!

 

[Bill_Bright]

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

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

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

 

[arroyo]

HODL dat CPU

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

 

[Liviu Cojocaru]

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

 

[ASOT]

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

Gaming not worth it,more of editing way.

 

[qubit]

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

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

 

[Liviu Cojocaru]

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

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

 

[Mighty-Lu-Bu]

Hi guys,

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

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

Thank you in advance for you respectable opinions

Look at this:

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

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

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

 

[John Naylor]

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

In After Effects

 

[Bill_Bright]

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

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

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

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

****

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

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

 

[Liviu Cojocaru]

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

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

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

****

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

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

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

Basic Requirements

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

That BASIC is exactly what I need.

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

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

 

[Mighty-Lu-Bu]

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

In After Effects

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

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

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

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

 

[Bill_Bright]

and as Microsoft specifies : W10 needs

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

That BASIC is exactly what I need.

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

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

 

[Liviu Cojocaru]

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

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

 

[qubit]

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

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

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

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

 

[eidairaman1]

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

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

 

[qubit]

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

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

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

 

[eidairaman1]

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

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

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