I am currently a CS student who likes to game when free time comes around. My beloved 4930k system has been showing symptoms that it is near EOL: sometimes it won’t boot and either the CPU power LED or RAM LED goes red and only succeeds after a few forced restarts.
I really want a Ryzen system, due to the clear multi-core benefits as I will be doing a lot of compilations as time goes on, specifically for Java, C, and Golang programs on both Windows and Linux.
Would a 2700 be a vastly superior experience for those workloads as compared to the 2600? I really like the value of the 2600, and can afford a 2700, but it would be a little painful. In your opinions, would the 2700 offer a sort of night / day improvement, as for example, I look at those Cinebench scores on the 2700 and just drool.
Very true, poor word choice, I’m mainly looking at scores like, from Cinebench for example, the multi-core speeds being in the 1400’s for the 2600 and 1800’s for the 2700. Was mainly wondering from a software development / compilation stand point if that really makes a note-worthy difference.
Well all of this comes down to personal preference. Consider this, from a percentage point of view the 2700 is 28% faster. If you are compiling a program in 5s on a 2600 it compiles in 3.6s on the 2700. This value might be negligent. If it takes 120min of the 2600 it would take 86.4min on the 2700. So, generally speaking: The longer the program takes to compile, the more you’ll benefit from the 2700.
Also, you mentioned you are a student, so probably you won’t be compiling programs with millions of lines of code, but rather smaller ones.
Thus, I assume the sensible choice would be the 2600. But, who cares about sensible choices, right? Personally, I’d pick the 2700… but since I’m owning a 2700X I’ll stick with my CPU.
(Edit: Talk to others as well. This is just my opinion )
Personally, I’d pick the 2700… but since I’m owning a 2700X I’ll stick with my CPU.
)