Title says it all, do we think there will be any significant benefit to a Ryzen 1700 vs overclocking a 1600X for streaming games on twitch/Youtube?
Or, secondary question:
Would my old ass PC with a R9 280 and a Phenom II X4 955 work as a streaming computer to capture from the main Ryzen PC?
Go for the 1700 if you are streaming and video editing, etc. Those extra 2cores and threads will help a lot.
To use a secondary system for the streaming part, you would have to invest in capturing hardware. Better invest in more cores and do it all at once. TeamPGP did a Doom stream not long ago and that was on an ryzen 7 with two cores disabled. So a 1600 OC might be the best bang for your buck for that. If you are interested in editing and stuff, go 1700.
Have you done any stream testing on the 1600x yet? I know from the own testing with the 1700 that it handles the workload really well but would be interesting to see how the 1600x would handle such a task, for example streaming at a lower resolution/bitrate with the 1600x might not be terrible.
Your better off as the others have said going with a new cpu and getting the 1700 for both streaming and gaming. If you get good enough cooling it will run almost guaranteed at 3.8ghz stable.
It can handle streaming 5Mb 1080P60FPS at 50-60% CPU use in Metro Last Light and in GTA V at 1080p60FPS at 3500kb (3.5Mb) it sits around 60-80% use.
The 1800X on the other hand in similar tests does 40% in same settings Metro Last Light and 60% in GTA V
(with all the same settings, etc)
1600X will give you the best bang for buck basiclly.
Its very good in gaming + streaming.
The 1700 will not have a massive benefit over the 1600X OC´d in gaming + streaming i think.
it might be worth the additional $80,- if you gonne overclock anyways.
Because with the 1700 you might drop a few less frames here and there.
But the 1600X will be more then fine aswell in most scenario´s.
@JokerProductions did some nice testing on that.
1700 for a little "future proof" worth the extra couple bucks.
1600x is a better part for just gaming, but if you plan on doing streaming as well, then the 1700 is worth it.
Not fully sure if it would be really worth the additional costs there.
If you factoring the additional cost of a decent X370 board + cooling,
for overclocking a 1700 to 4.0GHz + 3000mhz+ on ram reliable 27/4.
But if he wants the best experiance, then the 1700 would be a better pick yes.
No one said anything about overclocking, but you can overclock decently well on B350 and with the stock cooler. Meanwhile the 1600x doesn't even come with a stock cooler.
Yeah well certain B350 boards do indeed overclock fine.
But not all of them atm.
But looking at it from a pure cpu perspective, $80,- is still a bit of money,
which could eventually be trown towards a better gpu.
I mean the 1600X will be fine in most gaming + streaming scenario´s really.
But for the best experiance the 1700 might be worth it yes.
With the longevity of AM4, it should be easy enough to get a higher end part in a year or two or whatever, should he find that the cpu he picks is not sufficient. But for right now, as far as his question, the 1700 is the better pick. Overclocking or no. Is it worth the price increase? Well, that is up to him to decide, not me.
Dang, back from work and tons of discussion, sounds like 1700 is probably worth it.
Some clarifying info on build plans:
Motherboard - AsRock X370 Taichi (Best mid cost board I could find with two m.2 slots)
Cooler - ARCTIC COOLING Liquid Freezer 240
RAM - G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (Yes, RGB Ram...it's going to be a wall mounted PC so I wanted the comet effect available on this...)
SSD 1 - SAMSUNG 960 EVO M.2 250GB NVMe
PSU - PC Power & Cooling Silencer Series 750W 80+ Gold (Not that the PSU is that important to note here)
Mostly I think it comes down to how much those two extra cores will be utilized. Linus' Ryzen5 review had some interesting results for the 1600X which is what made me curious.
Those are fine parts.
Asrock Taichi is one of the best X370 boards out there really.
1700 or 1600X in terms of gaming they are pretty equally.
Wenn it comes to gaming + streaming both chips should handle that fine.
I'm somewhat hopeful that with that cooler I will be able to hit 4.0Ghz, which would be pretty darn fun.
Ya I am loving my x370 asrock taichi... and r7 1700
I am thinking of of purchasing a Ryzen 5 1500x to replace an Intel I7 2600 that has the ram socket going bad and put the savings toward getting an ssd to augment a 1TB hard drive. The only thing am worried is the 1500X has 4 cores but for $20 dollars more I can upgrade to an 1600. Will the 1500X give me enough performance to play games and stream, right know I am playing exclusively an old game you may haven't heard of Star Wars Galaxies. I really would rather take the saving and put it toward an ssd since I am probaly be spending between 200 to 400 dollars for the ssd. I need at least 500GB I really want 1GB. What would you do if you where in my shoes.
I would say for $20,- more just go with the 1600 really, assuming you will overclock anyway.
The 1500X does fall behind in certain gaming scenario´s a bit compaired to the 1600 (X).
This is mainlly been seen in the minimum frame rates.
Allthough the 1500X is basiclly a fine cpu for gaming aswell.
But wont be that much of an upgrade from your current 2600K.
Unless that Star wars game is pretty much the only game you are interested in.
Then the 1500X would be fine.
But yeah given the fact that you only pay $20,- more for a 6 core 12 threads part + Wrait Spire cooler.
that to me, brings the 1500X in a difficult spot to recommend.
Most people will overclock anyways.
So i personally dont really see a place for the 1500X in the market honnestlly.
So yeah if i was in your shoes, i would go with the 1600 for just $20,- more.
I personally not really like to speak about future proofing.
But with an eye on that, it might just be worth it afterall.
Am4 will be a 4 year platform atleast.
I don't trust Joker's testing.
I certainly think the $80 is worth spending for 2 additional Cores and 4 more threads if one can afford it. I compare this as if a separate dual core CPU with multi-threading was being offered, and the pricing is in line if you look at the new Pentiums.
Originally, I was waiting to see what the 1600X would bring hoping it would be better on thermal overhead, which it turns out it isn't. The 1700 is an all around better value in my view.