add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

First Build: AMD Ryzen 5 2600 vs Intel i5-8400

benckend

6 months ago

This PC would be used for gaming and work (CAD, Excel, etc). I'd love thoughts on the CPU choice since I'm not familiar with either. Which is the most future proof? I plan on playing The Wild Hunt, AC Odyssey, and BF 5. The most intensive work programs are probably SolidWorks and ANSYS Fluent.

Intel: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/HkbyBb

AMD: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/BWrpnH

Thoughts on fan selection and monitors would also be appreciated.

Thanks!

Comments

  • 6 months ago
  • 2 points

Absolutely zero contest, AMD wins.

First off, you mention about games you play, Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Battlefield V, and both use 12+ threads. Using the 8400 or any other 6 core, 6 thread CPU, or even the 9700K, an 8 core, 8 thread CPU, is not going to give you the best of experience in those games. 8400 is obsolete at this point in time, there is absolutely no reason to get it over the 2600. 2600 is a 6 core, 12 thread CPU, it's not ideal for those games, but it will do it better, far better.

I also don't agree with getting a 1060 over the RX 580. 1060 6 GB vs RX 580 8 GB is a competition strictly based on price. They are both equal with no more than 5% - 10% difference in gaming. Sure, more games are optimised for Nvidia, but the difference in performance is so minimal, the current price difference between the two is far greater. RX 580 8 GB is currently the better deal, and even more so if you can get the "pick two out of three games" on Newegg, because this effectively puts the GPU under $100 if you want both games. 1050 Ti is out of the question, for modern AAA games, which you're playing, don't consider it at all.

Future proof wise, neither. However, the 8400 is absolutely beaten out now in terms of performance, while the 2600 is enough for now. If you continue to play modern AAA games in the future, I would suggest an 8 core, 16 thread CPU. Why? It's a trend and games are rapidly increasing the number of cores they use. Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Far Cry 5, Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Battlefield V, Black Ops 4, these are all 2018 games that demand 12+ threads. Yes, the number of games that need it today are still far and few, but compared to the number of games that needed 12+ threads in 2017, there is a significant increase, and it will not be a surprise to see even more AAA games released in 2019 needing 12+ threads, because it is simply the trend. If you want to continue to have a nice experience with AAA games, 8 cores, 16 threads is not crazy. 1700, 1700X, 2700, 2700X, 9900K, depending on price, I would pick one of these.

The AMD list is a solid, well-balanced build, and has absolutely nothing wrong with it and great for everything you need it for. The only thing I would change is the PSU. Get a 550W for about $50, which is more than enough already. 750W is way overkill and not recommended. I know the price is appealing, since it's on sale, but you have no need for it, so paying $10 more and being less efficient is pointless.

Just my take on your situation.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Thanks for the input! I'm pretty torn between the two. I have a lot of friends who say the Intel build really outperforms because of the higher single core speed (particularly if you bump it up to the 9600k). But the R5 2600 is so much cheaper and the higher thread count is really nice.

Also, thanks for the comments on the build list, GPU, and PSU. I appreciate that a lot!

  • 6 months ago
  • 0 points

Clock speed is only half the talk. What clock speed gets you is FPS, what sufficient threads bring you is smoothness. If clock speed was everything, why not just pick the 8350K, a 4 core, 4 thread CPU then? It will overclock and hit 5.0 GHz just like the 8600K, 8700K, 9600K, 9700K and 9900K. SolidWorks doesn't need more than four cores, so it's clearly not for that. The reason is simple, games need it now. Two years ago, yes, it was unfathomable to think anyone would suggest getting a CPU with more than six cores for gaming, today, it's part of the demand, gaming demand has grown fast in two years.

The 2600 paired with the RX 580 8 GB can play every game in 1080p, with 60 FPS, at high detail without fail. Intel K CPUs only do it better if you want 120+ FPS (no Ryzen CPU can get you more than 120 FPS consistently in AAA games), which at that point, you might need a better GPU anyway. And if you're after 120+ FPS on AAA games, well, like I mentioned, those games need 12+ threads, which only the 9900K offers, so regardless, the 8400 is simply the wrong CPU to get.

Good luck.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Again, thanks for the clarification. I have ruled out the i5-8400 now and am only really considering the Ryzen 5 2600 or the i5-9600k. The final build difference is about $200 which is pretty significant. It sounds like you think the threads are more important than FPS. I'll have to look into that.

All the help is fantastic for a first-time builder like myself!

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

It's up to you.

Also, factoring the monitor as well, if you don't get a 144 Hz monitor, the 9600K giving you 144+ FPS isn't going to do anything for you, because the monitor won't display the frames quick enough anyway. If you're just going to buy a 60 Hz monitor, you'll only get 60 FPS. So if you buy a 144 Hz monitor to keep up with the FPS your computer is dishing out, it'll be more expensive as well, you'll need to add that cost on top of the extra $200 you're already spending on the computer itself. And for the record, if you are going for 144 FPS, I would recommend a GPU upgrade to something like the 2070, and someone can tell me if I'm entirely wrong on this, since I don't run tests, but the RX 580 is kind of pushing it at this FPS.

Take some time and watch some tech review videos, it might help you decide.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

I would go with the Intel build honestly. instead of the RX 580 I would go with a 1060 or 1050 Ti

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Thanks for the input! What are your reasons for choosing the Intel build? I chose the 580 because it was so cheap compared to 1060s (~$300). Do you have any recommendations or places I can find a good deal? I know the Ryzen 5 2600 is a little worse at gaming but will the i5-8400 handle the CAD software well?

Really appreciate the help!

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

1- The 1060 is around $229 while the RX 580 is $200. Radeon video cards are more suitable for video editing, while the 1060 is more for gaming. Sure, you can use both of them for anything, but that is what the companies had in mind when making them, (at least to my knowledge.)

Here is something to compare it to-

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1060-6GB-vs-AMD-RX-580/3639vs3923

2- Don't underestimate the 8400! it's a very good quad core chip and if you wanted to you could upgrade to an 8500, its not very much difference. I am more familiar with Intel than Ryzen, so you could take this with again of salt if you wanted.

3- the Ryzen system would be cheaper do to the very good stock cooler.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Thanks so much for the input. It seems that the i5-8400 is very solid despite the lack of 6 threads but the stock cooler of the 2600 is a pretty substantial component. I'll definitely have to consider these!

[comment deleted]
  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Single threaded performance is pretty similar between the two, but the additional threads on the 2600 makes it a pretty clear winner in my book since your programs can utilize them. It also comes with a better stock cooler, and you may want to consider a 2600x as well.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

The 2600 cooler seems to be awesome! I definitely like the boost to workstation capability of the 2600 for sure. Why do you think that so many people like the i5-8400 more? Is there something that makes it really stand out?

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Hmm? Plenty of people are buying AMD stuff over Intel these days, and this forum is plenty of them. :-) And no, the 8400 isn't a particular standout.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Neither build is ideal. Solidworks is OK with cores but it's not clear that the extra threads in a 2600 will match the extra clocks of an Intel 6-core. I wouldn't do an i5-8400 though; if you're going Intel, do it this way:

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Type Item Price
CPU Intel - Core i5-9600K 3.7 GHz 6-Core Processor $244.99 @ Amazon
CPU Cooler be quiet! - PURE ROCK 51.7 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler $36.35 @ OutletPC
Motherboard Gigabyte - Z390 UD ATX LGA1151 Motherboard $119.99 @ Amazon
Memory Corsair - Vengeance LPX 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory $119.99 @ Amazon
Storage Crucial - MX500 500 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive $67.99 @ Adorama
Storage Seagate - BarraCuda 1 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive $44.89 @ OutletPC
Video Card XFX - Radeon RX 580 8 GB GTS Black Core Edition Video Card $189.99 @ Newegg Business
Case NZXT - H500 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case $69.99 @ B&H
Power Supply SeaSonic - FOCUS Gold 550 W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply $68.79 @ B&H
Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
Total $962.97
Generated by PCPartPicker 2018-12-29 01:29 EST-0500

You aren't going to overclock much with that cooler but it will do for stock. If you want to push, look at a Thermalright Macho or Scythe Mugen 5 for another $15-20.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

This really helps a lot. I've heard a lot about the extra core speed of Intel chips balancing out the thread count of the AMD chips. I actually put together an i5-9600k build last night which is super similar. Would you mind looking at it? I'd really like to know why you chose that Mobo, SSD, and GPU!

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/XG9nq4

Thanks!

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Mobo was on price and the Gigabyte Z390 line is generally pretty good. The MX500 is one of several good all-around SSDs and for workstation use I didn’t think that a value class SSD like a BX500 was ideal. GPU mostly on price and value, might be a little light for high FPS gaming.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Thanks!

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

I have used AMD on a SolidWorks system for many many years also running AutoCAD Mastercam Etc and I have absolutely no complaints. Tired and Intel base system and all it did was overheat and crash constantly no matter what we did for cooling.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Thanks for the info. Hard to find people who've used SolidWorks. What GPU and CPU are you using? Do you do any gaming? I like the affordability of AMD A LOT (saving me $200 right now) but so many people say that Intel i5 stuff beats all the extra threads and gaming with AMD is pretty bad.

Love the help!

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Ryzen 5, on chip Vega graphics. Not a gamer.... But if it will crunch Solid Works without OC... Positive it will do fine for gaming, probably game even better with some OC, just keep it cool not over 55°c Intel has had the majority of the consumer market for so long..... AMD haters are coming up with any reason for folks not to buy their APU, LOL

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

I forgot to mention my AMD setup will do a massive 3d rendering in AutoCAD Mastercam SolidWorks, in a matter of 30 seconds to a minute
my Intel based computer would take sometimes 5-15 minutes and the onboard Radeon Vega graphics available on a lot of AMD CPUs saves you the extra expense of and expensive video card if you choose the right motherboard... The graphics will share some of your system memory but not enough that you will notice performance in either area in my opinion...

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Thanks for the clarification. SolidWorks can create a pretty heavy workload for sure! Was the Intel computer using a similar range CPU as the AMD build?

Thanks!

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

The Intel was an I7 8700k, ram 2666 32mb. Hope this helps. I received the Inel processor from a friend who was a beta tester.... But that was the one unleashed on the unsuspecting puplic..LOL At least I was able to rescue the M2, Ram and the SSD drives for the AMD build.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube