In Hindsight: Some of the Worst CPU/GPUs Purchases of 2017

Yeah I get what you're saying and with the Adobe software you are indeed correct. I just keep hoping that we'll see a new version that takes advantage of heavily threaded CPUs. Surely it has to happen soon ;)

Yes I'd be happy to throw the i3 back on the steaming pile when Adobe gets their act together :)
 
Great article, Steve. :) Wish I'd hopped on the GPU bandwagon early on, now I'm having some trouble getting my hands on the latest generation at a decent price...
 
"I can’t think of a single reason why someone would spend at least 40% more on the 1800X, even if they were binned chips that guarantee a 4 GHz overclock."

I bought an 1800X as soon as it launched and can give you several reasons.

• I wanted to support the AMD comeback, a semi-miracle which has benefitted us all and will continue to do so. Part of my money went towards making my - and your - choice next time much more advanced. You can thank me then. Anyone who can buy Ryzen (meaning it meets their needs) should do so. Intel was dragged kicking and screaming into the future, which they withheld as long as possible.

==> Are you going to reward Intel, or AMD, this time? <==

==> Do you want AMD to be here next time? <==

• The 1800X boosts to 4GHz with NO OC and KEEPING XFR which certainly matters to me, especially in a hot climate. No 'if' about it. It will do that, and that's what I wanted.

• I *did* get a binned chip, which I prefer in general even if I never push it. It should run cooler than any lower chip at the same load, which I also like.

And I'll have it for a long time, so the added cost per year was negligible.
 
"I can’t think of a single reason why someone would spend at least 40% more on the 1800X, even if they were binned chips that guarantee a 4 GHz overclock."

I bought an 1800X as soon as it launched and can give you several reasons.

• I wanted to support the AMD comeback, a semi-miracle which has benefitted us all and will continue to do so. Part of my money went towards making my - and your - choice next time much more advanced. You can thank me then. Anyone who can buy Ryzen (meaning it meets their needs) should do so. Intel was dragged kicking and screaming into the future, which they withheld as long as possible.

==> Are you going to reward Intel, or AMD, this time? <==

==> Do you want AMD to be here next time? <==

• The 1800X boosts to 4GHz with NO OC and KEEPING XFR which certainly matters to me, especially in a hot climate. No 'if' about it. It will do that, and that's what I wanted.

• I *did* get a binned chip, which I prefer in general even if I never push it. It should run cooler than any lower chip at the same load, which I also like.

And I'll have it for a long time, so the added cost per year was negligible.

"I wanted to support the AMD comeback" - You could stop there because that's about the only part that made sense. Can't really argue with that and it's your right. AMD probably care a lot less about you however ;)
 
Great article and coming from a country that gouges consumers already on prices for stuff that cost half or less than the U.S. I doubly agree with whats said about price/perf/availability and I'm glad I got in quick when the RX480 first came out they're nearly +200 bucks more now
 
Can you imagine, a bad purchase has to do with money. That said with the 7700K it’s just as much to do with compatibility and complete lack of an upgrade path. As for performance, get back to me in a year or two and let’s see how the 7700K and 8700K stack up.

Some bad purchases have nothing to do with money. When AMD/Nvidia re-name their cards, 8800GT is now the 9800GT or AMD 480 is now the AMD 580, and ask you pay a premium price over the predecessor that is a bad purchase. When Intel creates a paper launch forcing people to pay $100 over MSRP even then they are lucky enough to even find the CPU, that is a bad purchase. When Intel launches the budget i5-8400 but has no budget mobos to go with it, that is a bad purchase. When AMD launches a CPU like the bulldozer that shows no real world performance increase core vs core on the preceding Phenom II, that is a bad purchase; at least in my humble opinion.

The 8700k is clearly the better CPU then a 7700k yet if you were building a gaming PC in February 2017, the Intel 7700k was the way to go all the way up until Intel's 8th generation paper launch. AMD has nothing that can touch an i7-7700k in gaming especially when overclocked and the 7700k has plenty of horse power to continue to max out games for another 2-3 years (or longer) since the new consoles are re-using processors from 2013 and we know AAA titles are all built for console first and PC second.

The other issue is price & availability with the 8700k (and other items), I checked last week on Newegg and the 8700k was out of stock (until late November) and going for $450 ($100 over MSRP).

Below is a link to techreports first build with a 7700k from Feb-2017 (I could not find any previous builds on techspot other then Oct 2017)

http://techreport.com/review/31389/the-tech-report-system-guide-february-2017-edition/3

Cost for the 7700k - $350
Cost for a mobo - $125-150
Cost for 16GB 2400 RAM - $100
Cost for a GTX 1070 - $395

Now lets do a cost analysis for the 8700k build today

Cost for the 8700k - $420 ($70 over MSRP and out of stock until the 18th so you may not even get one)
Cost for a similar mobo - $125-150 (a wash)
Cost for the exact same RAM - $186
Cost for the exact same GTX 1070 - $450

So you would be paying a premium of $211 dollars right now to build that 8700K over your February 7700k build for basically the exact same gaming performance (especially once you OC the CPU and are GPU limited). Yes you get a much better CPU for content creation (no question there) but that $211 can go towards your future Intel i5-9500k, i5-15000k, i5-1600k, etc., and the IPC gain in there could blow away anything the current Kaby/Coffee lakes offer (similar to the jump from Nehalem to Sandy bridge IPC)
 
Some bad purchases have nothing to do with money. When AMD/Nvidia re-name their cards, 8800GT is now the 9800GT or AMD 480 is now the AMD 580, and ask you pay a premium price over the predecessor that is a bad purchase. When Intel creates a paper launch forcing people to pay $100 over MSRP even then they are lucky enough to even find the CPU, that is a bad purchase. When Intel launches the budget i5-8400 but has no budget mobos to go with it, that is a bad purchase. When AMD launches a CPU like the bulldozer that shows no real world performance increase core vs core on the preceding Phenom II, that is a bad purchase; at least in my humble opinion.

The 8700k is clearly the better CPU then a 7700k yet if you were building a gaming PC in February 2017, the Intel 7700k was the way to go all the way up until Intel's 8th generation paper launch. AMD has nothing that can touch an i7-7700k in gaming especially when overclocked and the 7700k has plenty of horse power to continue to max out games for another 2-3 years (or longer) since the new consoles are re-using processors from 2013 and we know AAA titles are all built for console first and PC second.

The other issue is price & availability with the 8700k (and other items), I checked last week on Newegg and the 8700k was out of stock (until late November) and going for $450 ($100 over MSRP).

Below is a link to techreports first build with a 7700k from Feb-2017 (I could not find any previous builds on techspot other then Oct 2017)

http://techreport.com/review/31389/the-tech-report-system-guide-february-2017-edition/3

Cost for the 7700k - $350
Cost for a mobo - $125-150
Cost for 16GB 2400 RAM - $100
Cost for a GTX 1070 - $395

Now lets do a cost analysis for the 8700k build today

Cost for the 8700k - $420 ($70 over MSRP and out of stock until the 18th so you may not even get one)
Cost for a similar mobo - $125-150 (a wash)
Cost for the exact same RAM - $186
Cost for the exact same GTX 1070 - $450

So you would be paying a premium of $211 dollars right now to build that 8700K over your February 7700k build for basically the exact same gaming performance (especially once you OC the CPU and are GPU limited). Yes you get a much better CPU for content creation (no question there) but that $211 can go towards your future Intel i5-9500k, i5-15000k, i5-1600k, etc., and the IPC gain in there could blow away anything the current Kaby/Coffee lakes offer (similar to the jump from Nehalem to Sandy bridge IPC)

By your own example you're paying just 20% more for the 8700K system and with that you get 50% more cores which will obviously end up being better for gaming in the future, while you're also buying into a platform that will support the next generation of CPUs.

Your example will look really bad if next week the 8700K is selling at the MSRP and don't kid yourself we know it will be at some point in the not to distant future so buying a 7700K rig now is about the dumbest thing you can do.
 
By your own example you're paying just 20% more for the 8700K system and with that you get 50% more cores which will obviously end up being better for gaming in the future, while you're also buying into a platform that will support the next generation of CPUs.

Your example will look really bad if next week the 8700K is selling at the MSRP and don't kid yourself we know it will be at some point in the not to distant future so buying a 7700K rig now is about the dumbest thing you can do.

I'm not arguing which is the better buy today, I completely agree with you going with the 8700k makes more sense even with the extra cost. My point was more that if you had made your 7700k build earlier this year, you still have a kick *** CPU that won't need replacement for several years and was a much cheaper build then a 8700k build is today.
 
It would also have been nice to see older CPU's in the tests say FX 63xx/83xx or i7/5 2xxx CPU's for example as alot of countries around the world pay significantly higher prices for hardware than in the U.S. it's usually a lot longer between upgrades
my own system for example: AMD FX8320@4.2GHz Asus CHVF mobo 8GB Mushkin DDR3-2400MHz ram and an Sapphire Nitro+ RX580 8GB OC (BIOS modded to RX580) and two 120GB SSD's in RAID0 = $1,407.29NZD today but to just replace the mobo CPU and ram here would cost more than that alone $1,211.96 + 15% GST (sales tax) and pnp
 
It would also have been nice to see older CPU's in the tests say FX 63xx/83xx or i7/5 2xxx CPU's for example as alot of countries around the world pay significantly higher prices for hardware than in the U.S. it's usually a lot longer between upgrades
my own system for example: AMD FX8320@4.2GHz Asus CHVF mobo 8GB Mushkin DDR3-2400MHz ram and an Sapphire Nitro+ RX580 8GB OC (BIOS modded to RX580) and two 120GB SSD's in RAID0 = $1,407.29NZD today but to just replace the mobo CPU and ram here would cost more than that alone $1,211.96 + 15% GST (sales tax) and pnp

Here's one test: https://www.techspot.com/review/1474-ryzen-vs-older-budget-cpus/

Gamers Nexus also has an FX-8370 and an i5-2500K appearing in some benchmark results. They even did a bit on Phenom II this year: https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2898-amd-phenom-ii-cpu-revisit-in-2017-x6-1090t-1055t

Basically at the moment you are largely GPU limited (@1080p) and would not necessarily see large FPS gains from moving to, say, Ryzen. Even if you'd see an overall improvement in responsiveness and would get a smoother experience in the games you play, the difference may be hard to justify at those prices. Then again, replacing the motherboard, CPU and memory has never really been the cheapest of upgrades...
 
Most of these "bad purchase" have to do with price rather then performance.

The 7700k is a great CPU and at the time king of gaming performance, AMD could not touch it for gaming performance yet it's over priced (unless you get it at Microcenter for $279).

The AMD 1600x is bad purchase (or any AMD CPU after the 1600 for gaming) when you can get a 1600 for less but for equal money it's a great purchase.

I disagree about the 1600X, really good bang for the buck if you get a deal on it. I got a system, for an amazing price for my son. With ASUS B350 MB I overclocked it with basic Corsair $30 air cooler and the thread performance and overall performance was amazing according to Geekbench results and comparisons. I had single thread performance that was beat by only 4 other mainstream Intel I series chips. Also, it almost beat my Ryzen 1700 for overall performance, with 2 cores and 4 threads less. I added an on sale 240mm coolermaster liquid cooler, only about $80, and it can do this all day long now. Plus when I run it at stock speeds it has handled everything we've thrown at it as good as any past cpu I've owned. Yes, if you build a system and buy parts at suggested retail prices it may not look as good, but the market changes everyday with sales etc. Plus, I like the option of just running stock on some systems for 100% reliability rather than overclocking a lower Ryzen 5.
 
Mr Walton's arguments are all about price and upgrade path ("new parts are same price for better performance. I feel ripped off") ("I have to buy new board for my new CPU, what a ripoff!"). He forgets that sensible people build their PCs to actually use them, usually for 3 to 5 years, and they don't worry about what comes next being faster/cheaper. For the complainers there have always been many examples of this phenomenon, (self-induced buyer's remorse). For some reason, the gloom and doom folks all seem to have jobs writing for tech sites now. Gather your snowflakes, see how many "likes" you can get spreading negativity. After all, you're entitled...

I typically buy a slightly lesser CPU/MB combo, don't get hooked into paying top dollar for fastest cpu etc. I keep the system for 3-4 years, but it is still very viaable and reliable. You'd be surprised what I just got 2 of my AMD FX based system with Radeon R9 and 7870 graphics. I got about $450 each, and I purchased new systems from $650-800. They are MUCH faster without too much cash outlay. Yes, I might need to add memory to one, and I added a liquid cooler to one. However, long term these will still have good value when I sell them 3-4 years from now. My sons, and I at times, do not need the extra 10-20 FPS we might get by spending $300-700 more per system! Crazy wasted money IMHO. I have on ocasion upgraded graphics card, but again good deals selling not too old GPUs. You need to know the market and always look for the swee spots. We have 7 desktops in my house, there are 5 of us plus 2 Media PCs, and I probably spend as much as most people do on 3-4 over the years. I think this article is actually fairly good.
 
Not sure about the negativity around the 7700K here, it's still one of the fastest gaming CPUs around, will still be a very fast CPU in upcoming titles. If you were building a high end gaming PC at the start of 2017, the 7700K was the logical choice. The 8700K and Z370 means it makes no sense to purchase a 7700K now but what were gamers supposed to build between January and October 2017?

My point is that just because the 8700K came out, it doesn't suddenly make the 7700K a bad buy had you chosen to build a gaming rig earlier in the year. It will still continue to be a very good gaming CPU for many years to come. The lack of upgrade path sucks, but by the time you actually need to upgrade the 7700K for gaming in a few years, even the 8700K would probably be considered somewhat outdated.
 
Back