hello, been out the game for awhile.. coming for an upgrade for sure my bro is finally buying my rig... done some research, and it looks like the following options are in consideration... x299 - i7 7800x $335, 4x4gb ram $200, mobo $180 - $715 x370 - Ryzen 1700x $360, 2x8gb ram $145, mobo $185 - $690 z370 - no stock on 8700k and tired of waiting... do you think the extra pci-e lanes for x299 and quad channel memory make it worth going that route?
Ryzen 1700 is cheaper. Asus Strix B350 is cheaper and every bit good enough. $299 1700 (Newegg) B350 Strix $119 So there's $120 saved already. So no (to the PCIE lanes 'cause you get loads on Ryzen) and no to quad channel memory.
7820 is the minimum worth considering for X299 imo. You should be comparing to 1600X not 1700(X) for six core.
You don't get loads on Ryzen unless you go x399 Threadripper You get 24 with Ryzen, 16x GPU , 4x NVMe, 4x Chipset then you are done and relying on the PCIe lanes in the chipset, which is fine for some stuff like Wifi etc a slow drive. Similar will happen with 7800x you get 4 additional lanes this might be enough for you, depends what you need it for, I was already quite lane dependant on my old setup and relied on a z77 with PLX/PEX switches which work well for GPU lanes, this is an option with 7700k and probably 8700k (eventually) But all this lane crap that put me off buying an upgrade to my old system, I was building something new, I did not want to be maxed out from the start, so for me threadripper was exactly what I needed, all the lanes, just a shame it's not an Intel CPU, it's no slouch though. I am now using 40 lanes for my GPUs quite a few for my drives, no SATA inside, that is the past, well once I get off my old SATA SSD Raid 0 array.
I meant it more comparatively than specifically the 1700. For example B350 is not comparable to X299. Firstly the board will cost you well over double and secondly X399 slaughters it lane wise. I would compare the B350 (and the chips that run in it) to Z370 or whatever it is the 8700k runs in and that only has 16. I certainly don't think that investing into X299 and buying a hex core chip is a very sensible thing to do though. I would strongly imagine the 1700 is quite competitive when compared to the 7800x and you don't need to remortgage your house to get in on the action.
@Vault-Tec tec, thanks for the response..B350 not really an option, want the ability to go sli and the pci-e lanes. though I might go 1700 or even 1600x for the slight cost savings if i did go that route. i know quad channel is insignificant, but like @sandys said, im not ready to spend this kind of money and already max my lanes out. @Bindibadgi whats up man...long time...you still around lol? give me some insight on the 7820, cuz im having a hard time spending $600 for 2/4 more cores/threads...hardly any more L3, and no extra lanes edit...microcenter has it for basically $520 if I buy a mobo there as well...so about $185 more than the 7800x...they also apparently have an i5 8400...but still, the pci-e lanes...
The biggest draw of X299 (imo) is the prospect of grabbing a cheap(ish?) 7900 series CPU in 5-6 years time, while having a relatively (compared to X399) cheap entry point.
@Wakka, my thoughts as well...i had half a mind to go the i5 8400 route, but i want those pci-e lanes...should knock it out tomorrow
wait...so just reading in another thread...the socket 2011 v3 i7 6850k has 40 pci-e lanes? for $349??
It depends entirely on if you have applications that will actually see any advantage with quad-channel (very few in practice see more than a minute performance increase outside of specialist analysis and simulation), or need multiple PCIe 16x slots (for gaming, going from twin x16 to twin x8 makes basically no difference in performance). Outside of bragging rights, the only really unique thing to do with lots of PCIe lanes is arcane NVME setups, e.g. a pair of NAND m.2 SSDs and an Optane cache drive on the ASRock X299 ITX board (two m.2 slots link to the CPU for VROC or JBOD, one links to the chipset for transparent caching). Or possibly experimenting with 10GbE add-in cards.
@edzieba, so if i go x299 or x99, and add a gtx 970 for sli, i shouldnt expect to see much improvement over sli'd 970's on z370, and quad channel memory improvement is also minor over dual channel as well, but wouldnt the gains start to compound a little for both benefits? especially if I add an m.2 like a 960 evo or pro?
If you're gaming, I'd expect no benefit from dual x16 over dual x8, and no benefit from quad-channel memory at all. Depending on CPU, I'd expect overall better performance on z370 due to faster single-threaded performance. An m.2 drive may (or may not, it depends on what process the game uses for streaming in assets) reduce initial load times, but it will not have any effect on actual game performance. Even the difference between a CPU-connected m.2 drive and a drive connected via the PCH is so minuscule as to be difficult to measure in artificial benchmarks, let alone in real-world use.
Yea. I'm wedged in the chair. They'd have to remove the window to get me out and that costs too much so they just let me stay. I say 7820 based on the priceerformance. 6 core on X299 is not worth it, but if you don't have the $ to go higher go for the AMD option of 8700K. Personally I'd still do the 8700 if you're a gamer, otherwise a 1700.
If you just want the lanes due to Nvidias restriction on lanes for SLI and are gaming then a 7700k and something like a Asrock Supercarrier makes a strong case, similar PLX equipped boards will surface for the 8700 in the fullness of time. If you want 3GB/s + transfers between drives of your system then get more proper lanes x299 (with right chip) or x399 if ultimate single core CPU performance is not top priority.
