Seems Intel's confidence still hasn't diminished.

hmmm...looks to me like the i5 8600 is the only intriguing proc on that list. at $225 it is competitive with Ryzen 7, with slightly higher clocks/ipc... but it will be hot and relatively hard to cool...requiring (to me) at least a closed loop vs. the perfectly good (and overclockable) *free* wraith cooler adding at least $80 in cost if you do not plan on watercooling the Ryzen too.

tunejunky:

hmmm...looks to me like the i5 8600 is the only intriguing proc on that list. at $225 it is competitive with Ryzen 7, with slightly higher clocks/ipc... but it will be hot and relatively hard to cool...requiring (to me) at least a closed loop vs. the perfectly good (and overclockable) *free* wraith cooler adding at least $80 in cost if you do not plan on watercooling the Ryzen too.

The 8600 has 4 fewer threads too, so depending on your workload it still might not be sufficient. But for gamers, I personally would recommend the 8600K over a 1700(X).

schmidtbag:

The 8600 has 4 fewer threads too, so depending on your workload it still might not be sufficient. But for gamers, I personally would recommend the 8600K over a 1700(X).

i see your reasoning and i would tend to agree. but that's also mainly for high twitch FPS games/ultimate performance. for people who play MOBA's and RTS games they do not need to overclock, i dare say (the mass market) that they won't. which gets back to the Ryzen 7 saving a minimum of $80 with one fewer part to buy. the Intel K series is going to be the esports cpu regardless.

tunejunky:

i see your reasoning and i would tend to agree. but that's also mainly for high twitch FPS games/ultimate performance. for people who play MOBA's and RTS games they do not need to overclock, i dare say (the mass market) that they won't. which gets back to the Ryzen 7 saving a minimum of $80 with one fewer part to buy. the Intel K series is going to be the esports cpu regardless.

Haha I have a rig dedicated to nothing but gaming based on Ryzen and if I were to go back in time to make the choice again, I would. After all, I'm not a competitive gamer and I'm perfectly content with 60FPS. I've also built a gaming PC for someone else based on Ryzen. That being said, I'm certainly not one to discourage people from getting a Ryzen for gaming, but, the 8600K is objectively a better gamer's CPU vs a Ryzen 7. Whether or not it is necessary is a whole other story, but, both CPUs are arguably unnecessary.

are we being forced to the gtx 1060 because it sucks at mining? it's time again to do my graduation presents and i'd really rather do the rx580/freesync monitor. but right now rx 580s are going for way more than the gtx 1060. into the realm of "get a freaking job and buy your own" instead of "attaboy".