Similarly ro DeckerdBR I am looking to upgrade an aging 2500K. This is not a complete system build just the mobo and CPU. I have already managed to get my hands on 16gb of 4000mhz ddr4 ram at a comparitively good price so I am not limited by ram speeds. I have been in the Intel camp since I started building PCs, however, since all the vehement Intel bashing thats appeared I have started to look more towards AMD. The i5 9600K was initially going to be my primary choice, however the initial £300 asking price, plus middling performance seem to have limited its appeal. This made me look more towards a Ryzen 7 2700 or 2700X. However recently the 9600K has dropped under £250.... https://www.overclockers.co.uk/inte...ocket-lga1151-processor-retail-cp-65n-in.html ..... and includes a free game I was looking to get into the bundle. From a completely neutral standpoint which way would you go. Intel or AMD? I know this can like asking some people Man U or Liverpool, Tories or Labour' however I am genuinely a bit stuck at the moment! The PC will be used as a bit of a 'Jack of all trades' rather than having a specific focus. Thanks for any help.
I'd go for a 2600X. Plenty fast enough for games, more threads than Intel for when you need them, £50 less to put towards an m.2 drive
Its certainly a consideration. My main worry with AMD has been temps. Its going into my Ncase with a Noctua U9s. How are people finding them? The 2600X does seem to be the sweetspot at the moment.
Power consumption is about the same as the 9600k and as the ryzen has a proper soldered IHS, thermals should be pretty much the same.
Normally I would say pay a bit more for the extra cores as you don't upgrade often, but in this case, the 2600x is hard to beat in terms of value. I would go with a 2600x and upgrade the CPU in 3-4 years when you need more cores.
I'd also go with the 2600X in this case. The extra cores won't do you any good for gaming, and the cash (as said above) can be spent elsewhere that'll benefit you more.
