Buying a new CPU...

Hey everyone... I need a little bit of intel here. My current plan is to grab a new CPU, but honestly? I'm stuck. Right now, my top-tier setup is basically just an Intel Core i5-7600K—well, if you can even call it that at this point. I have no clue if I should be looking at a new motherboard or if I can actually squeeze more life out of what I've already got. Or maybe I'm just dreaming? Anyway, here’s the breakdown of my current rig:

Motherboard: ASRock FM2A75M-DGS
CPU: AMD A8-5600K APU 3.6GHz 4-core
GPU: Radeon HD 6670 GDDR5 1GB VRAM
RAM: 12GB RAM

Once I finally get the processor sorted, the next move is a new graphics card—maybe an NVIDIA GTX 1060 or something in that ballpark.
Thanks in advance for the help! 🙂

You’re looking at needing new RAM, a motherboard, and a processor—it's getting pricey. Honestly, if you want to see a real jump in gaming performance first, I guess the graphics card is holding you back way more than the CPU right now. 😉

Maybe just round out the CPU, motherboard, and RAM upgrade later on.

Thanks for the reply 🙂

I guess I should follow up on my first post.

I've been looking at the Intel Core i5-7600K, which is currently sitting at about $358, but I’m stuck on a bit of a dilemma: do you think it’s actually worth shelling out an extra $250-$100 to jump up to the Intel Core i5-8600K? I'm curious what kind of specific advantages or features might come with that upgrade—maybe things like XFR2 and similar tech—that could tip the scales, especially since their raw speeds seem relatively close? My main focus would be video editing and post-production work using Adobe Premiere Pro, Adobe After Effects, DaVinci Resolve, and Blackmagic Fusion. My plan is to pair it with a mid-range B450 chipset or X470 chipset motherboard so I have the flexibility to upgrade to a much more powerful Zen 2 architecture processor down the road. Essentially, I want to grab something affordable right now that is at least twice as fast as my current Intel Core i7-4790K.

Thanks.

Performance-wise, it’s within 5%, and the pricing at Telebit looks pretty solid:

CPU AMD Ryzen 5-1600X (3.6GHZ TO 4GHZ, 19MB (3MB+16MB), C/T: 6/12, AM4, 95W), 36MJ
DDR4 16GB (2x8GB), DDR4 3000, CL16, DIMM 288-pin, G.Skill F4-3000C16D-16GISB, 36mj
MB Asus PRIME X370-PRO, AM4, ATX, 4x DDR4, AMD X370, S3 8x, DP, HDMI, 36mj
CPU COOLER ENERMAX ETS-N31-02, 1X FAN 92MM, AM4, S1151

TOTAL: $1049

Maybe I'd look elsewhere for the cooler, though; their selection in that area seems a bit thin.

@crimsonstag84/">@@crimsonstag84: That sounds like a solid plan, and honestly, I was hoping you might aim for a price point right around there. My only real hesitation is whether I'd be losing out on anything by choosing between x370 vs x470 if I decide to upgrade to a future processor down the road? Since I don't really care about pushing extreme overclocks, I imagine that cooler would be perfectly fine too—it's certainly not like trying to tame an Intel Core i7-4790K, right? 😬

You shouldn't lose anything in terms of an upgrade path; I guess BIOS support and compatibility will stick around for a few more generations on the AM4 socket.

Honestly, you’re getting arguably the most powerful motherboard available at that price point. That extra headroom might really come in handy down the road, especially if you decide to jump to a 12 or 16-core processor later on.

Timothy Kim60 said:By the way, that’s easily one of the strongest motherboards you can get for that price, which might come in handy down the road, especially if we start seeing 12 or 16-core processors hitting the market more often.

Yeah, I caught Buildzoid's video where he was venting about the VRMs on that specific board 😬... honestly, I don't feel like PB2 or XFR2 are absolute dealbreakers for me, since my main priority is predictable performance—you know, knowing exactly how long a render will take rather than having it fluctuate unexpectedly—so I don't think an X470 chipset is strictly necessary either...

Look, you can overclock that CPU to maybe 3.8GHz on this board—it'll be rock solid—or just stick to stock settings if you prefer predictable performance.

And when you eventually decide to jump to the next generation, you won't be left in the dust.
Truth is, the 2000-series processors aren't noticeably slower on X370 boards compared to X470.
The real kicker between the 1000 and 2000-series isn't the chipset; it's the memory controller, which lives right inside the processor itself.

They aren't any slower on an X370, honestly. The actual tech is built into the processor itself, so the motherboard shouldn't really make a difference.

crimsonstag84 said:In terms of speed, they're within 5% of the target, and you can find a pretty solid price combo over at Telebit:

Intel Core i5-7600K (3.6GHZ UP TO 4GHZ, 19MB (3MB+16MB), C/T: 6/12, AM4, 95W), 36MJ
DDR4 16GB (2x8GB), DDR4 3000, CL16, DIMM 288-pin, G.Skill F4-3000C16D-16GISB, 36mj
MB ASUS Prime X370 Pro, AM4, ATX, 4x DDR4, AMD X370, S3 8x, DP, HDMI, 36mj
CPU COOLER ENERMAX ETS-N31-02, 1X FAN 92MM, AM4, S1151

TOTAL: $1049

The only thing I might suggest is looking elsewhere for the cooler, since their selection in that specific area seems a bit thin.

I'm feeling a bit conflicted regarding the configuration mentioned above:

I went ahead and ordered the ASUS Prime X370 Pro from Best Buy for $307 (it's currently in transit), so thanks for the recommendation, and now I need to pick out the RAM and the processor. This G.Skill kit looks like by far my most affordable and reasonable option, but when I check the QVL table for this motherboard, I noticed that for this specific RAM, there isn't a little dot "•" in the 2DIMM column to indicate the following: • 2 DIMM: Supports one pair of modules inserted into either the blue slots or the black slots as one pair of Dual-channel memory configuration

Is it actually possible that there's a matched RAM kit that wouldn't function properly in an AM4 board? Not to mention that it isn't even listed on the QVL for the Ryzen 2000 series...

Have I perhaps misunderstood how this works? I could just buy it, give it a shot, and then return it within the 14-day window if it really doesn't work.

No, it’ll work just fine—even at 3000MHz once you enable the D.O.C.P. profile. I've seen tons of people running that exact RAM on various motherboards, including models much lower-end than yours. Your only real hurdle would be if you're running an ancient BIOS version.

So, I followed all the recommendations and picked up the Freezer 33 cooler. My BIOS was outdated at first, so the RAM wouldn't climb past 2133 MHz, but once I updated everything, I managed to get it running at 3000 via DOCP. Now it keeps settling back down to 2993 🤷...(I don't really feel much of a difference, though I did pay for 3000 😬). Otherwise, it handles an overclock to 3200 just fine without any freezing, at least until I put it through the wringer with an IBT test, which is when the failures start happening. When using DOCP, it sits at the base clock of 3.7 GHz, and it only boosts to 4 GHz on a single core for just a few moments, which honestly feels a bit pathetic. When I try auto-overclocking to 4GHz, it holds steady at 82 C without throttling.

The scores are pretty much what I expected, except for the IBT results, which show me getting fewer gigaflops than an overclocked Intel Core i7-4790K (around 60 versus 78), even though this should be twice as fast... Does anyone have any insight into why that might be?

Sent from my Galaxy Note 5

It’s just Intel software 🤷 FX can't hold a candle to anything R5, so it's definitely not worth your time

BTW, skip the auto overclocking. Do it manually. With a freezer setup, I've got my 33 R5 1600 running at 1.35v with LLC level 2, hitting 3.9GHz while staying under 70C. If you can even squeeze out 4GHz (we're talking about the 1600X, right?), those extra 100MHz usually aren't worth the headache because they demand a massive voltage jump

Also, make sure to update all your software (HWInfo, etc.), because those X models had a bit of a temperature offset issue—the actual temp is usually lower than what you see

I’ve gone ahead and refreshed everything, but my Tctl is sitting at 102°C (offset) while the Tdie is at 82°C—which is basically what I'm seeing in the Intel Extreme Tuning Utility as well. I tried switching the Tensor Processing Unit over to auto just to see what would happen, but from what I've been reading, that setting is really intended for liquid cooling setups, so I think I'll revert back to Tensor Processing Unit I or just stick to manual settings like you suggested. I'd really rather not let it climb past 80°C, especially since it spends so much time running at 100% load across all cores. Then again, if I'm being honest, is there actually any rendering software out there that can truly punish a CPU as brutally as these stress tests do?