Since the other cheap deal from Amazon.co.uk expired, I hope this may help a few folks looking for the cheapest option presently for this CPU.
Purchased using one of the many fee free foreign currency cards, making sure you pay in € at the check out it is currently €234 + €5.82 shipping which works at at just under £204 at the time of writing.
It may be worth looking for a cheap Motherboard if you need one at the same time, if I find one I will add it here as an edit.
EDIT: I've put together a quick build for anyone interested in a complete system, this is by no means the best system, or the cheapest system but gives you a good idea what sort of price you can build a 6c/12t machine for now. I've tried to include sellers that have P&P free, or inclusive even if the parts cost slightly more.
I've chosen not to add a graphics card, since everyone will have a different requirement, but have specified a 550W PSU, so it should be suitable for anything up to a GTX 1080Ti, there is also a few alternates for the case for £5 more with extra fans etc.
If you look at the total cost for this build (excluding the graphics card of your choice) it comes in at £485-£490, which is superb value considering the cheapest Intel 6 core CPU is £400 on it's own.
EDIT: Memory changed as other price had expired, swapped to Corsair LPX 3000 which is 100% compatible with Ryzen, pushes example system price up to £515+
EDIT: Grab one of these now if your were intending to buy down to €209.99 works out at only £180.90!!!! Postage included.
EDIT: As of Evening 20th April back up to €230 inc P&P - so that is approximately £193.
Top comments
Uncommon.Sense to powerbrick
7y 49d3#2
You don't get a cooler with the 1600X, unfortunately.
Latest comments (89)
Nate1492
7y 47d#89
If you needed to upgrade right now, and had 200 quid for a CPU? I would ask what you intend to do with the computer.
Rendering? I'd check to see if you really needed a CPU to render, because most people are better off using hardware acceleration.
I just can't see the work load that makes sense here. The Ryzen CPU is still maturing, it has teething issues that I wouldn't want to recommend to someone.
'Here, this one will probably be good in 6 months, but you may have to mess with firmware and drivers and turn off settings for it to be ok'.
or 'This is super mature, no issues out the box, you will be supported fully from install onward'.
To me, I have little interest in helping someone build a PC rig just for me to have to trouble shoot CPU issues.
Also, I'd like to see how AMD mature with their next release, which I can only expect is a 'tock' improvement to IPC and not an architecture bit. The motherboards are also just out the door in terms of maturity.
So yeah, I would recommend the 7600k to most people at 200 (I'd also suggest waiting a bit though).
Uncommon.Sense
7y 47d#88
It was a £180 for a good while, hence if you look at people who have received them they have comments on the price paid after the postage refund since they were posted from Amazon UK, so it should have been free.
As for the other thing, ignore upgrading, if you had to recommend a CPU for a new build in this price bracket £200ish then you would say go with the 7600k?
DaveDesire
7y 47d#85
@Nate1492, explain to me what CPU you can get for £180 that is better than a 1600 @ 4.0GHz
Also...
My order is now due to be delivered Sunday. Not bad after an initial 1-2 month estimate
Now the question is... do I wait for the mini itx boards to be released.
Nate1492 to DaveDesire
7y 47d#86
I mean, it's not £180... This is £193 via France.
The i5 7600k is pretty damn good compared to the 1600. AMD aren't comparing the 1600 to the 7600k because it gets walloped. They keep pointing it against the 7500 locked chip, and who can blame them? It makes their chip look on par.
The 7500 is a good chip, but I wouldn't recommend it, just like the 1600 is a good chip, I wouldn't recommend it either.
The 7600k is a very sweet chip, I don't see any deals for the chip, but it's baseline of 216 on Amazon is not too bad.
A few months ago there was a 7600k for 203 on hotukdeals.
But there are still lots of legs on older i7 chips, compared to the 1600.
I couldn't, with good faith, recommend someone with a 2500k to upgrade to a ryzen 1600, the upgrade is small. With that said, I couldn't recommend an Intel upgrade either.
lumsdot to DaveDesire
7y 47d#87
7600k is 4 cores and 4 threads
1600 is 6 cores 12 threads and cheaper, and has better productivity scores
Nate1492
7y 47d#84
On one hand, you make a positive assumption for the Ryzen 1700 (OC'd and compares to the 1800x) but you refuse to use the same price and logic to compare the OC'd 7700k which OC's and compares to the 1800x and 6950x.
Also, let's be clear, the 1700 is a good price value for HEDT work, but it doesn't hit the same speeds as the 1800x. AMD have binned heavily as they are using very similar chips between the 1800x, 1700x, and 1700.
Anyway, I don't want to beat up the Ryzen too much here, it's a good chip that has a legitimate place in the market.
But there is far too much tall tails and fake information floating around on top of it.
It offers a nice alternative for HEDT and allows heavily threaded workstation activities at a fraction of the Intel equivalents.
But it stops there, once you cross into typical productivity, gaming, and every day use, it is fairly average.
My biggest surprise is how big of step down the 1500 is compared to the 1600/1600x. There was a lot of hype for the Ryzen 4 C 8 T chip, but their hyper threading (SMT) has been extremely abysmal. So, this first generation to me is completely avoidable, wait for the CPU to mature, see what Ryzen 2.0 is like, and then make a decision.
Also, that means we can see what Intel fires back, as they finally have competition. This is good for everyone.
shizer
7y 47d#83
I bought used 2x8GB LPX 3000mhz for £82 at CEX which is a decent price I think - It comes with 2 year warranty and the ones I received looked new. Only down side was I received the blue ones..
Here's a 3200mhz for slightly cheaper: https://uk.webuy.com/product.php?sku=SMEM8G3200#.WQIxnNIrJQI
These are however unbranded on the site, so you don't know which you're getting.
Just received my second one today, total paid after the postage refund was £177.91, bought with my Supercard, very happy at that price indeed.
alanbeenthere
7y 47d#81
Were the intel cores at 100% utilisation? many of the game based reviews using a 1080ti show it as so, while the ryzen cores had room to grow...i.e with next gen cards.
ShroomHeadToad
7y 47d#80
If you assume the 7700K is clocked 20% above stock to 5GHz~ and the performance scaling is linear then 297 score becomes 237 (297*0.8 ) @5GHz~ which is what the 1800X scores at stock, my overclocked 1700 can match (basically the same chip but cheaper), the £1500~ Intel 6950K chip despite being clocked far lower than the 7700K wins it due to 10 cores not sheer frequency, Ryzen is awfully close to that 10 core BEAST (in highly multi-threaded apps) at a fraction of the price.
This is like arguing the i7-7700K over the more expensive Intel 6/8 core chips such as the Intel i7-5820K, in lowly threaded apps the i7-7700K will win due to far higher operating frequency, in fact it beats the £1500+ 10 core 6950K as well, in heavily threaded apps no contest.
There is a reason Intel can charge a small fortune for the X99/X299 platforms and they do sell very well; they support more cores despite all of them clocked well below that of the cheaper i7-7700K, for the vast majority of consumers like you, the i7-7700K is clearly the best option as the software you run do not (at least not currently) utilise the extra cores to justify the higher cost of the Intel HEDT platform.
The Ryzen platform does not cost more, the 1700 is around the same price as the 7700K.
The R5 1600 at this price is close to the cost of a i5-7500 and the better chip.
Nate1492
7y 47d#79
Did you close your eyes after the first screen shot?
What about the fact these are all stock clocks?
And are you not at all concerned that it takes 8 cores 16 threads of the 1700 to *match* 4 cores 8 threads of the 7700k without any OC?
I mean, if you want to draw conclusions without good information, just to back your undying support for Ryzen, that's up to you.
Photoshop, word, excel, powerpoint as well, even using the 1800x OCd does not beat stock 7700k.
Anyway, I get it, you really really really think that Ryzen is amazing, no problem.
But hey, if you only game, use microsoft word, excel, photopshop, power point, and compile... Then you want the i7. If you... Stream while gaming? Then go Ryzen.
That's the selling point I'm hearing over, and over, and over again. If you stream while gaming, it's a good chip.
Do you have any other use cases?
ShroomHeadToad
7y 47d#78
Try again, using the link you provided:
Clearly you do nothing but game on your pc, but that is OK.
Nate1492
7y 47d#77
If you compile code as your productivity task, then Ryzen is not meant for you.
Let's start: What production tasks do you do? I'm seriously curious.
Who renders without CUDA? Again, serious question. What's the point of handbrake if you just use a GPU to render?
Nate1492
7y 47d#74
How about you pick up a 4c 8 t CPU for 50 bucks?
That means nothing, you could end up with Bulldozer.
People who paid for the i7 2600, back in 2011? 6 years ago?
I'm sure the 2500k buyers, paying $100 less then, are more than happy with how that CPU has held up.
Uncommon.Sense
7y 47d#73
The refund on shipping applies to anything that they ship from inside the UK if it would have been free btw. I've had at least 10 things shipped for free.
djeyewater
7y 47d#72
Thanks very much! Sent them a message and got a quick reply back on my email saying they'd refund me the shipping.
shizer
7y 47d1#71
Amazon.fr and no issues sending in English -Think theres an English option on the drop down after you select the item. Translate feature on Google chrome helped.
I did ask them before it was shipped and before i was charged - so it was just removed from the final amount rather than a straight refund.
djeyewater
7y 47d#70
Mine arrived today too (had amazon.co.uk on the shipping label). Where did you ask for a refund - on the amazon.fr site? I guess no problem sending them a message in English?
Uncommon.Sense
7y 47d#69
If you are willing to buy a locked 4c/4t CPU for £180-200, when there is a fully unlocked 6c/12t CPU for the same price, well then you are pretty dumb to be fair.
There is no argument unless you want if for the amazing integrated graphics, there is no long term future in 4c/4t CPU's and people who paid the premium for the i7 2600 onwards are now really starting to see it was a great investment, so why would you now go backwards.
Some people are just strange.
ShroomHeadToad
7y 47d#68
Competes with the i5-7500 at what, gaming?
More cores are needed for production, you can only overclock a quad core so far...
Games are optimised for Intel 4C/8T (consumer chips) and rarely scale beyond 8 threads (bar games like BF1), this will change as Intel is moving their new 6 core chips to the consumer end to counter the Ryzen series.
If you just play games an old Intel i7-2600K can be bought for £100 or less, overclocked 4.5GHz+ and play all the latest games without any issue.
shizer
7y 47d#67
Final price £182 - arrived today. They removed shipping costs when I asked, so ask!
Nate1492
7y 47d#66
I mean, is it really? It's new, it's a fairly high price in terms of relative speaking, this processor competes with the i5 7500, which is indeed consistently cheaper.
I'm shocked people are so happy to pay 200 for an i5 equiv and 300 for an i7 equiv and then call it a great price. It's just a bit surprising, I think a lot of people really really want AMD to succeed and are just throwing money at them for a good effort.
Uncommon.Sense
7y 48d#65
It seems that Amazon have de-listed it for now, as that is a third party seller called CYBERTECH COMPUTER, they do this when an item goes out of stock and there is high demand against it. Keep your eyes open for it over the coming days, it may pop up again.
HangTime
7y 48d#64
Price now €259.99
DaveDesire
7y 48d#63
Ordered one last night when it said one left in stock. When I went to checkout is said 1-2months. Hopefully it doesn't take 1-2 months!
Uncommon.Sense
7y 48d#62
Yeah, sometimes when an item has just gone OOS, there maybe orders cancelled etc and they then have stock, but you have to be quick!
JasonD1995
7y 48d#61
It says on the site that there is 1 more in stock. Does that mean it is ready to dispatch?
shizer
7y 48d#60
Maybe - Amazon.fr is selling the MSI Tomahawk for 106.39 EUR. I'm not sure what FX they use but it should be around £90 excluding delivery which is under Amazon 'Premium'. I've messaged CS about the delivery charge on the Ryzen
Uncommon.Sense
7y 48d#59
Or if you want full size ATX then it's this one - ASUS PRIME B350-PLUS at £88.72
Worst case scenario you find it cheaper elsewhere and cancel, at least they don't take the money until they ship it.
JasonD1995
7y 48d#56
Cheers! Will look in to ordering then
Uncommon.Sense
7y 48d#55
As per the above really, due to the incredible price, they will need to source more stock. Given that it is Amazon, I hardly think AMD will hold back supply, so again 1-2 months is conservative so as not to get your hopes up.
ShroomHeadToad
7y 48d#54
Depends on the product, highly unlikely with this item, it will be shipped as soon as Amazon have enough stock to fulfil your order probably a week or two at most.
JasonD1995
7y 48d#53
It says delivery in 1-2 month? Will it take that long?
Uncommon.Sense
7y 48d#52
I just bought another one, no idea why I've got a 1700 @ 3.8GHz also.
ShroomHeadToad
7y 48d#51
A steal at this price!
djeyewater
7y 48d#50
Went for one at this price too, just need to get a mobo, RAM, and better cooler now. Oh, and a case to put it in.
marcz
7y 48d#49
Also bought one. £187 and i subscribed to free trail of prime on amazon.fr , i dont belive we can get back our 6€ for delivery as it wouldn't charge us in 1st place. But it's still cheapest. Now Msi b350 tomahawk, lpx 16GB & evo 850 500gb (aria do it for £136 now if anyone intrested...) Thanks!
Gkains
7y 48d#48
I would concentrate on who makes a supply although the vendor is important if you ever have to use their warranty.
Realhardtechs maintain a database of PSU showing who made it and linking to reviews where possible. Here's the EVGA page, so find out the model number and see who makes the 600W white. http://www.realhardtechx.com/index_archivos/Page2293.htm
shizer
7y 48d#47
Appreciate your input. A novice followup question - I hear EVGA is a pretty good. EVGA 600W White Series be any good?
Regarding graphics card - I've tracked a couple of GTX 980s which ended between 150-160. I've started to track 1060s 6GB hoping to see them end in a similar price range - the two seem very similar. Maybe RX 480 8GB could be fall to my price range with the RX 500s releases. I'm pretty patient, so I'm prepared to wait to get a good deal.
Gkains
7y 48d#46
The VS range is Corsair's cheapest range. I would rather spend a bit more and get something better made although Uncommon.Sense is right, Corsair have good warranties and decent CS AFAIK.
If you are buying used, £150 graphic card could get easily get a decent card. R9-290 can be had for ~£120 or so but does use a bit of power. A used GTX970 uses less but seems to have aged worse (in terms of performance).
So say, ~150W for the CPU, mobo etc. and around 150-200W for the GPU. So 350W max. I'd spend a bit more on the PSU and get something made by Seasonic or Superflower. Even FSP is better than this cheap CWT made Corsair VS.
Maybe this XFX which is made by Seasonic (but I believe Seasonic are using a sub-contractor for these, similar to the cheaper Superflower supplies): https://www.cclonline.com/product/205076/P1-600B-XTFR/Power-Supplies/XFX-XT-600-600W-80-Bronze-ATX-Power-Supply/PSU1263/
£47.71 + £3.95 P&P
Or at least get a Corsair CS which seem to be a bit better made than the VS series. But yes, it's hard to get a decent supply for under £50 or so.
Uncommon.Sense
7y 48d#45
Yeah it's alright nothing special but has a half decent warranty for peace of mind.
shizer
7y 48d#44
Thanks - the one you mentioned seems reasonably priced.
Uncommon.Sense
7y 48d1#43
Anything above 600W is overkill, just make sure you get a good quailty PSU with solid rails, not some cheap cheerful £14.99 600W job from eBay.
shizer
7y 48d#42
Thanks - bought for £187.34. I'm hoping I can claim back on the delivery charges - it didn't recognise I had prime.
Building my first PC and I've waited for the price of this to go below £200 . Now I need to find a good B350 mobo and I'll probably ebay (Used) rest of my components.
Question for you techys; based on this CPU and spending close to £150 on a graphics card, how many W power supply would I need?
HangTime
7y 48d#41
Nice one, was showing as €244 earlier. If DDR4 wasn't so expensive I would probably get this and a B350 mobo to replace my aging 3570k.
HangTime
7y 48d#39
Price has gone up €10
Uncommon.Sense to HangTime
7y 48d2#40
Thanks, but showing as €209.99 - mega price drop!!!
Bump the thread if possible instead of making a new one?
dem0nx
7y 48d#37
Just a heads up. This seems to have been sent from Amazon UK and not Amazon FR.
Uncommon.Sense to dem0nx
7y 48d#38
That's great news, since it means you can reclaim the postage if you are a Prime member.
slayermatt
7y 48d#36
Yeah, there definitely needs to be more testing done to find the limits. Far too much isn't known.
Mo786
7y 48d#35
Thank you
temptation to buy has now gone up ten fold
Mo786
7y 48d#33
I suspect this would incur custom fees?
Uncommon.Sense to Mo786
7y 48d1#34
You suspect wrong, it's coming from France and until we are no longer in the EU all of the V.A.T. and duty is already paid at the point of purchase.
arfster
7y 48d#32
Mrrm, fair point.
I'd like to see some proper in-depth breakdowns. For example, my area is machine learning, which involves lots of transfers in and out of ram, and all cores being maxxed out. My guess is that scenario will benefit disproportionately.
alexmurphy01
7y 48d#20
I have an i5-4400 and a GTX1070 - would upgrading (I'd need a new motherboard and ddr4 ram too) have a noticeable impact on games? It doesn't really struggle with anything as far as I've noticed.
Mpt11 to alexmurphy01
7y 48d#31
I would have said not enough to justify the huge outlay. I have an i5 750 and rx480 and it's not really causing me any problems so you should be fine
slayermatt
7y 48d#30
YThe thing is by your logic of the ram effects the whole system and therefore doesn't equate exactly to a 42% price increase would be like saying "well for only 50% more I can get a 1700 but its not really 50% more because the whole system is faster".
You wont get anywhere near that 42% performance gain even if you'll roughly get what you're stating taking the whole cost into account. The issue is the system isn't slow to start with. Most would be better off upgrading something else - £35 might be enough to increase someones budget allowing a 1070 vs a 1060 for example. Although I will agree RAM is one of the few things worth spending extra on. Seeing as we've not long moved onto DDR4 I doubt we'll move onto a new standard for awhile.
arfster
7y 48d#25
Does seem as if Ryzens benefit unusually from faster ram - saw a suggestion it was due to some internal interconnect on the chip being matched to external ram speed.
Shame ram prices have spiked so much, I really need 64gb.
slayermatt to arfster
7y 48d#29
From what I can gather while the benefit is good - its only good given RAM never really mattered before. Currently the performance gain is less than the price increase. Thats also not considering the ballache people have had getting systems with higher speed RAM to post! At the end of the day while better RAM helps, you're probably still better off spending the money you save not going for it on another component where the benefits would be greater. Or just pocketing the cash.
revolver31
7y 48d#28
My nvme sm951 was a pain to get working with windows 7 (won't use 8.1 or 10) but once I did, man its fast, it boots (8 sec) a few seconds faster than my 840 evo, snappy on web browsing esp when loading up heavy loaded hd picture web sites, it's the dogs baws, but it does get expensive buying high capacity drives, also my sm951 (256gb nvme) does get a bit toasty at high speed sustained, it's faster than the consumer 960 I believe, and to make sure I didn't throttle on heavy use I just bought some small 5/6mm solid copper heatsinks with thermal clue, and no issues, it's awesome although one thing is, it's a cheesy green pcb with copper heatsinks so not the best looking M.2 but fast did I mention fast.
Optimus_Toaster
7y 48d#22
If you are trying to save money I'd recommend not getting an NVME drive. The specs look impressive but they are not noticeably faster than a normal SATA SDD for Windows or any of the programs and games I use.
bouttime2 to Optimus_Toaster
7y 48d#27
My NVME M.2 ssd has 6 times faster read speeds than my Sata ssd. And 4 times better writes.
bouttime2
7y 48d#21
I have the 256GB installed in my Asus ROG laptop using Windows NVME drivers. It's blisteringly fast.
The_Hoff to bouttime2
7y 48d#26
NVME is a bit of a weird one, they always score stupidly high for seq work, and maybe 1.5x faster than a decent SATA SSD for random work (which is much more typical work load).
RE drivers, install the Samsung driver, you'll get a further uplift.
BetaRomeo
7y 48d1#24
Errr... I wasn't trying to "win" anything - I was simply pointing out the benefits of faster memory in order to help others here. After claiming I hadn't thought my comment through, you then went on to get your numbers wrong (twice), which completely undermined your attempt to correct me. That you got your numbers wrong is a fact, not an opinion.
Still, I guess HUKD would be better off without someone who is so quick to "win" what they see as a personal (?) Internet argument (rather an offer of advice to help potential consumers) that they'll do it with completely wrong figures, rather than thinking through their comment to make it accurate and helpful. So, bye.
Uncommon.Sense
7y 48d1#23
You win, I quit, the internets is all yours.
BetaRomeo
7y 48d1#19
I wouldn't pair a Ryzen CPU with slow DDR4 as recommended in the OP.
There are some tests where the difference is 10+% - and in gaming in particular, there are some cases where the difference is ~20% (slightly more even than with Intel CPUs). Better to spend the £35 today than be glaring angrily at your slow DDR4 in a couple of years, flagrantly aware that it's holding back your entire system in several areas, but understandably reluctant to spend £100+ to replace it.
Otherwise, a great little CPU for a workstation or a new budget gaming build. Those looking to upgrade a gaming system from an i5-K or better, however, may not find there to be much difference - and sometimes an i5-2500K can even pull ahead of the 1600X (and even the 1800X) in games like GTAV.
alanbeenthere
7y 49d#10
The SSD noted in the op is oem so no driver support and no rapid mode, if that matters to anyone.
Uncommon.Sense to alanbeenthere
7y 49d#12
Yes indeed, but I've not had any issues from builds I've done, the other option is the Intel 600p 128GB SSD however it is quite a bit slower. Or many, many other options if you want something bigger or faster.
The_Hoff to alanbeenthere
7y 49d2#13
SM961 is a 960 EVO and will take 960 EVO drivers and FW via Magician.
adderrson to alanbeenthere
7y 48d#18
Not true. Drivers for this SSD are available here. Have the 256gb version myself. Says Windows 7 drivers but they work perfectly well on Windows 10
GasGaGlide
7y 49d#17
Yeah I got it straight away. Not like me to easily purchase but thankfully I knew the 1600 would be the best buy so I didn't mess around when they became available. I did wonder what happened.
Uncommon.Sense
7y 49d#16
It was on offer Monday for a few hours until they corrected the price.
I think if you wanna overclock the ram you will need the overpriced x370 due to having the independent clock but not all have them, of course it's upto you to decide if it's worth it (Oc ddr) with the infinity fabric and all that it does make some strides in gaming, if we could see 4000/4200 it would be nice, reports of a 10% increase in SOME games with 3600 over 2400, also the quad chips don't seem to go past 2933 at the moment which is a little odd given they're all the same ccx's.
The straight up 1600 with cooler is the one for me if I was to buy but board prices are way to high for what they are, but the 1600 has the balance of threads core speed all the cache of the r7, the 65w tdp and the cooler it is the best package imho.
ShroomHeadToad
7y 49d1#7
Should be able to get around 3.6-3.7GHz overclock on the R5 1600 even on cheap B350M boards, the more expensive X370 boards seem poor value paired with this considering all the Ryzen chips seem to hit a ceiling @4GHz.
Heat!
Uncommon.Sense to ShroomHeadToad
7y 49d#8
Indeed, had I not needed the extra features of the ASRock Taichi I bought to go with the R7 1700, I would have gone with a much cheaper B350 board. Might buy a 1600 to see how it does in comparison, and if it will OC any better, than the 3.9/4.0GHz I can get on the 1700.
slayermatt
7y 49d1#6
Thats the thing that makes the X slightly less worthwhile. Most places seem to be getting a comfortable 3.8/3.9 ghz on the Spire with the standard 1600, while the X seems to cap out generally at 4-4.15ghz on water. The lack of included cooler is the reason most places don't recommend the 1600x because of the extra cost (mainly associated with the need to buy a cooler) for relatively minor gains (5% on average I think I saw floating around).
Uncommon.Sense
7y 49d2#5
Happy to be proven wrong, but every review I have seen, read, and the sites selling them advertise it without a cooler, and the shipping weight is about 150g for the 1600X maybe they have two SKU's available?
powerbrick
7y 49d#4
Sure that hippy off gamersnexus or was it ttl off oc3d said it came with the wraith Max.
tempt
7y 49d#3
HotEURyzenDeals
powerbrick
7y 49d#1
may as well plump up the extra 17 quid and get the X with a better stock cooler, the 'max'.
Uncommon.Sense to powerbrick
7y 49d3#2
You don't get a cooler with the 1600X, unfortunately.
![Fresh Breakfast Meat Box (Using code) @ Campbells Meat [Haggis / Lorne Sausage / Bacon / Black Pudding & More]](/images/topics/208684_1.jpg)
![[Xbox One] Q. u. b. e: Director's Cut on Deals with Gold](/images/topics/208716_1.jpg)
Opening post
Purchased using one of the many fee free foreign currency cards, making sure you pay in € at the check out it is currently €234 + €5.82 shipping which works at at just under £204 at the time of writing.
It may be worth looking for a cheap Motherboard if you need one at the same time, if I find one I will add it here as an edit.
EDIT:
I've put together a quick build for anyone interested in a complete system, this is by no means the best system, or the cheapest system but gives you a good idea what sort of price you can build a 6c/12t machine for now. I've tried to include sellers that have P&P free, or inclusive even if the parts cost slightly more.
ASRock AB350M-HDV AMD Socket AM4 Motherboard - £66.02
Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB 2x8GB 3000MHz DDR4 C15 - £114.99
Samsung 128GB Polaris NVMe M.2 80mm SSD - £67.49
Fractal Design Core 1100 Series Micro ATX Case - £29.99
Corsair VS550 ATX/EPS Vs Series 80 Plus PSU - £38.02
I've chosen not to add a graphics card, since everyone will have a different requirement, but have specified a 550W PSU, so it should be suitable for anything up to a GTX 1080Ti, there is also a few alternates for the case for £5 more with extra fans etc.
If you look at the total cost for this build (excluding the graphics card of your choice) it comes in at £485-£490, which is superb value considering the cheapest Intel 6 core CPU is £400 on it's own.
EDIT: Memory changed as other price had expired, swapped to Corsair LPX 3000 which is 100% compatible with Ryzen, pushes example system price up to £515+
EDIT: Grab one of these now if your were intending to buy down to €209.99 works out at only £180.90!!!! Postage included.
EDIT: As of Evening 20th April back up to €230 inc P&P - so that is approximately £193.
Top comments
Latest comments (89)
Games? Productivity (Excel, photoshop, word) 7600k.
Rendering? I'd check to see if you really needed a CPU to render, because most people are better off using hardware acceleration.
I just can't see the work load that makes sense here. The Ryzen CPU is still maturing, it has teething issues that I wouldn't want to recommend to someone.
'Here, this one will probably be good in 6 months, but you may have to mess with firmware and drivers and turn off settings for it to be ok'.
or 'This is super mature, no issues out the box, you will be supported fully from install onward'.
To me, I have little interest in helping someone build a PC rig just for me to have to trouble shoot CPU issues.
Also, I'd like to see how AMD mature with their next release, which I can only expect is a 'tock' improvement to IPC and not an architecture bit. The motherboards are also just out the door in terms of maturity.
So yeah, I would recommend the 7600k to most people at 200 (I'd also suggest waiting a bit though).
As for the other thing, ignore upgrading, if you had to recommend a CPU for a new build in this price bracket £200ish then you would say go with the 7600k?
Also...
My order is now due to be delivered Sunday. Not bad after an initial 1-2 month estimate
Now the question is... do I wait for the mini itx boards to be released.
The i5 7600k is pretty damn good compared to the 1600. AMD aren't comparing the 1600 to the 7600k because it gets walloped. They keep pointing it against the 7500 locked chip, and who can blame them? It makes their chip look on par.
The 7500 is a good chip, but I wouldn't recommend it, just like the 1600 is a good chip, I wouldn't recommend it either.
The 7600k is a very sweet chip, I don't see any deals for the chip, but it's baseline of 216 on Amazon is not too bad.
A few months ago there was a 7600k for 203 on hotukdeals.
But there are still lots of legs on older i7 chips, compared to the 1600.
I couldn't, with good faith, recommend someone with a 2500k to upgrade to a ryzen 1600, the upgrade is small. With that said, I couldn't recommend an Intel upgrade either.
1600 is 6 cores 12 threads and cheaper, and has better productivity scores
Also, let's be clear, the 1700 is a good price value for HEDT work, but it doesn't hit the same speeds as the 1800x. AMD have binned heavily as they are using very similar chips between the 1800x, 1700x, and 1700.
Anyway, I don't want to beat up the Ryzen too much here, it's a good chip that has a legitimate place in the market.
But there is far too much tall tails and fake information floating around on top of it.
It offers a nice alternative for HEDT and allows heavily threaded workstation activities at a fraction of the Intel equivalents.
But it stops there, once you cross into typical productivity, gaming, and every day use, it is fairly average.
My biggest surprise is how big of step down the 1500 is compared to the 1600/1600x. There was a lot of hype for the Ryzen 4 C 8 T chip, but their hyper threading (SMT) has been extremely abysmal. So, this first generation to me is completely avoidable, wait for the CPU to mature, see what Ryzen 2.0 is like, and then make a decision.
Also, that means we can see what Intel fires back, as they finally have competition. This is good for everyone.
Here's a 3200mhz for slightly cheaper: https://uk.webuy.com/product.php?sku=SMEM8G3200#.WQIxnNIrJQI
These are however unbranded on the site, so you don't know which you're getting.
Also seeing as I'm making a cheapish build, I found this decent looking case for around £35 - I've been looking for a full windowed case for under £50:
https://www.scan.co.uk/products/aerocool-aero-300-black-mid-tower-case-with-side-window
Doesn't look too bad. I'm looking to order after this bank holiday.
This is like arguing the i7-7700K over the more expensive Intel 6/8 core chips such as the Intel i7-5820K, in lowly threaded apps the i7-7700K will win due to far higher operating frequency, in fact it beats the £1500+ 10 core 6950K as well, in heavily threaded apps no contest.
There is a reason Intel can charge a small fortune for the X99/X299 platforms and they do sell very well; they support more cores despite all of them clocked well below that of the cheaper i7-7700K, for the vast majority of consumers like you, the i7-7700K is clearly the best option as the software you run do not (at least not currently) utilise the extra cores to justify the higher cost of the Intel HEDT platform.
The Ryzen platform does not cost more, the 1700 is around the same price as the 7700K.
The R5 1600 at this price is close to the cost of a i5-7500 and the better chip.
What about the fact these are all stock clocks?
And are you not at all concerned that it takes 8 cores 16 threads of the 1700 to *match* 4 cores 8 threads of the 7700k without any OC?
I mean, if you want to draw conclusions without good information, just to back your undying support for Ryzen, that's up to you.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_1800X/7.html
There's some more, that includes a few OC's.
Photoshop, word, excel, powerpoint as well, even using the 1800x OCd does not beat stock 7700k.
Anyway, I get it, you really really really think that Ryzen is amazing, no problem.
But hey, if you only game, use microsoft word, excel, photopshop, power point, and compile... Then you want the i7. If you... Stream while gaming? Then go Ryzen.
That's the selling point I'm hearing over, and over, and over again. If you stream while gaming, it's a good chip.
Do you have any other use cases?
Clearly you do nothing but game on your pc, but that is OK.
http://techreport.com/review/31366/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-ryzen-7-1700x-and-ryzen-7-1700-cpus-reviewed/11
Most code compiling benefits from single core IPC and single core speed.
More options in rendering? Do you mean what Linus said, more options in the quality sliders?
Gaming+Streaming at some silly high quality, on one computer? Fine.The best streamers use a second PC anyway, ask them.
But compiling? Not true.
Ryzen is THE BEST CPU for Game Streaming? - $h!t Manufacturers Say Ep. 2
Who renders without CUDA? Again, serious question. What's the point of handbrake if you just use a GPU to render?
That means nothing, you could end up with Bulldozer.
People who paid for the i7 2600, back in 2011? 6 years ago?
I'm sure the 2500k buyers, paying $100 less then, are more than happy with how that CPU has held up.
I did ask them before it was shipped and before i was charged - so it was just removed from the final amount rather than a straight refund.
There is no argument unless you want if for the amazing integrated graphics, there is no long term future in 4c/4t CPU's and people who paid the premium for the i7 2600 onwards are now really starting to see it was a great investment, so why would you now go backwards.
Some people are just strange.
More cores are needed for production, you can only overclock a quad core so far...
Games are optimised for Intel 4C/8T (consumer chips) and rarely scale beyond 8 threads (bar games like BF1), this will change as Intel is moving their new 6 core chips to the consumer end to counter the Ryzen series.
If you just play games an old Intel i7-2600K can be bought for £100 or less, overclocked 4.5GHz+ and play all the latest games without any issue.
I'm shocked people are so happy to pay 200 for an i5 equiv and 300 for an i7 equiv and then call it a great price. It's just a bit surprising, I think a lot of people really really want AMD to succeed and are just throwing money at them for a good effort.
Realhardtechs maintain a database of PSU showing who made it and linking to reviews where possible. Here's the EVGA page, so find out the model number and see who makes the 600W white.
http://www.realhardtechx.com/index_archivos/Page2293.htm
Regarding graphics card - I've tracked a couple of GTX 980s which ended between 150-160. I've started to track 1060s 6GB hoping to see them end in a similar price range - the two seem very similar. Maybe RX 480 8GB could be fall to my price range with the RX 500s releases. I'm pretty patient, so I'm prepared to wait to get a good deal.
If you are buying used, £150 graphic card could get easily get a decent card. R9-290 can be had for ~£120 or so but does use a bit of power. A used GTX970 uses less but seems to have aged worse (in terms of performance).
So say, ~150W for the CPU, mobo etc. and around 150-200W for the GPU. So 350W max. I'd spend a bit more on the PSU and get something made by Seasonic or Superflower. Even FSP is better than this cheap CWT made Corsair VS.
Maybe this XFX which is made by Seasonic (but I believe Seasonic are using a sub-contractor for these, similar to the cheaper Superflower supplies):
https://www.cclonline.com/product/205076/P1-600B-XTFR/Power-Supplies/XFX-XT-600-600W-80-Bronze-ATX-Power-Supply/PSU1263/
£47.71 + £3.95 P&P
Or at least get a Corsair CS which seem to be a bit better made than the VS series. But yes, it's hard to get a decent supply for under £50 or so.
Building my first PC and I've waited for the price of this to go below £200
Question for you techys; based on this CPU and spending close to £150 on a graphics card, how many W power supply would I need?
Bump the thread if possible instead of making a new one?
temptation to buy has now gone up ten fold
I'd like to see some proper in-depth breakdowns. For example, my area is machine learning, which involves lots of transfers in and out of ram, and all cores being maxxed out. My guess is that scenario will benefit disproportionately.
You wont get anywhere near that 42% performance gain even if you'll roughly get what you're stating taking the whole cost into account. The issue is the system isn't slow to start with. Most would be better off upgrading something else - £35 might be enough to increase someones budget allowing a 1070 vs a 1060 for example. Although I will agree RAM is one of the few things worth spending extra on. Seeing as we've not long moved onto DDR4 I doubt we'll move onto a new standard for awhile.
Shame ram prices have spiked so much, I really need 64gb.
RE drivers, install the Samsung driver, you'll get a further uplift.
Still, I guess HUKD would be better off without someone who is so quick to "win" what they see as a personal (?) Internet argument (rather an offer of advice to help potential consumers) that they'll do it with completely wrong figures, rather than thinking through their comment to make it accurate and helpful. So, bye.
If you want to build a system that's going to last for a few years, it's an extra £35 for DDR4-3200 here: https://www.alza.co.uk/corsair-16-gigabytes-kit-ddr4-dram-vengeance-3200mhz-cl16-led-white-led-d4373304.htm
There are some tests where the difference is 10+% - and in gaming in particular, there are some cases where the difference is ~20% (slightly more even than with Intel CPUs). Better to spend the £35 today than be glaring angrily at your slow DDR4 in a couple of years, flagrantly aware that it's holding back your entire system in several areas, but understandably reluctant to spend £100+ to replace it.
Otherwise, a great little CPU for a workstation or a new budget gaming build. Those looking to upgrade a gaming system from an i5-K or better, however, may not find there to be much difference - and sometimes an i5-2500K can even pull ahead of the 1600X (and even the 1800X) in games like GTAV.
The straight up 1600 with cooler is the one for me if I was to buy but board prices are way to high for what they are, but the 1600 has the balance of threads core speed all the cache of the r7, the 65w tdp and the cooler it is the best package imho.
Heat!