Intel Kaby Lake vs Coffee Lake?

Hey guys I'm gonna be building my first PC. I'm gonna be using it mainly for music production (FL Studio, Cubase) and also for photo editing with light room. I'm looking for a quad or six core processor under 300 dollars. I don't do any type of gaming so overclocking doesn't matter to me. Any recommendations?

Attached: download.jpg (275x183, 9K)

ryzen

ryzen is literally better in every way after the intel patches. if you're set on intel, then coffee lake 100%.

I was told that Intel works better for multitasking, but my desk too right now has a 7 year old AMD quad core and it still works great. I haven't given much thought to Ryzen but if it performs the same, any recommendation you'd have?

The 2600X without a doubt. Or if you want an iGPU, the 2200G is amazing value, and will still perform much, much better than your 7 year old CPU.

why the fuck would you buy kaby lake lmao

i5 8400 will work well for your needs.

t. Unabashed Intel shill

Who the fuck said intel works better for multitasking ? Intel right now is only good for gaming, for everything else , including your requirements will be done better by ryzen.

Ryzen maxes out at 4.5ghz with a large AIO. You should just aim for 4.2 for light overclocks.

Mostly people on music production forums. Not sure how much they know about PCs though, but they all said they run intel in their pro rigs. I could give two shits about what brand I have just as long as it works.

Also, what's better? Less cores, but higher core speed, or more cores with lower core speed? Ex 4 cores running at 3.7ghz vs 6 cores running at 3.2 ghz?

I was told that it's not core count, but core speed that matters with multitasking and that as long as I get a quad core at least, that core speed shouldn't make much of a difference.

>Intel works better for multitasking
don't you mean M E G A T A S K I N G?

AMD and their FX line were shit up until a year ago when they made major gains in multithreaded and productivity tasks, so maybe those guys haven't caught up.
Newer AMD processors can even reach roughly the same level as Intel on gaming if the Intel CPUs have fixes for meltdown and spectre applied.

For tasks like music production, rendering, more cores should be your first choice. You have been told wrong. Hell why do you even trust music forums, they are dumbasses who buy whatever salesmen sell them, buy this mac, its cutting edge, buy intel, its cutting edge, and they buy it and then defend it.
In your example 6 cores at 3.2 gHz is obviously better. Hell, it'd be fucking retarded to even buy anything less than 6 cores in these days.
I'll repeat, Intel is only good for gaming, and after the spectre patches I doubt its even good for that.

The Ryzen 2600k. 6c/12t, 3.6 base 4.2 boost, comes with a decent stock cooler, ,all for $229 USD. Pair it with a mid range mobo for more value. It is better than an 8600k (~$245USD) IF your work loads like threads, and very close +- few % low thread performance when both are stock.
While you can OC a 8600k to be better than the 2600k in applications that are single threaded/do not scale well with threads, you would need to purchase good after market cooling ($40-70 depending on OC), and a Z370 mobo (slightly more money). You would end up spending ~$100-130 more for the 8600K platform if you want to OC it (which you do not want to deal with). This is why I recommend the 2600K with your stated budget, if you want to shell out the extra cash and trouble an OCed 8600k could be better. Go over the /pcbg/ and they can help put a system together.

> For tasks like music production, rendering, more cores should be your first choice

I'm an AMD shill but this isn't always true. It heavily depends on the programs you use. Many popular "productivity" apps are still very much bound to a few threads and consequently clock speed will help you more. It's hard to find benchmarks for some of these apps so sometimes its a crap shoot, OP needs to do his due diligence.

Based 8400 is what you wanted

Yeah partly my fault for believing then lol. Probably since their pros everything they say is taken to heart. But seriously you are right about them buying into things. I know half the music production people use Macs because it's "better and has no viruses" which both are obviously bullshit. A windows computer can do the same or more than a Mac can, at half the cost hundreds of times the customization is what I always think. I will do some research on my programs to see if they can benefit from more cores or not since the poster below you said some applications can only make use of so many cores. Thanks for your help user.

Thanks user. I'm gonna try to look up specs and what not for the programs I use to see if it's worth getting more cores or less cores with more speed.

Get the Ryzen 2600X instead. Zero reason to go Intel unless you are gaming 720p@400hz or something.

Attached: 1449973087102.png (880x759, 1.07M)

OP everyone else in this thread is full of shit. You can get an enthusiast class Kaby Lake 7640X for like $200 and get socket compatibility for all of Intel's high end chips in case you ever want to upgrade. Why even bother with a mainstream chip when you can easily afford the bigger socket? And in case you're worried about the lack of an iGPU, you can buy a $80 GT 1030 that will outperform any iGPU and still be under your budget.

Threadripper

tfw skill using skylake

Attached: a6e.jpg (500x428, 61K)

most of them buy mac's and get done with it its not like they care about speed and efficiency

the only intel chip right now that smokes ryzen on multitasking including a whole part of the city if gets overclocked is the 7980xe but for the money it asks you can buy a damn threadripper..

Anyone knows if Ableton benefits more from a higher core count or higher clock speeds. More specifically 2700X vs. 8700K. Will also be used for gaming a lot

Thoughts on this build?
AMD FX-6300 3.50GHz
8GB Gaming Memory DDR3
GTX 1050 Ti 4GB GDDR5 Graphics Card
1 TB 7200RPM Hard Drive

>Ableton
if you do multitrack works then more cores=better

Pleb tier.
Sorry mate, don't take to heart, but a Ryzen 2200G lowend system would kick the crap out of everything but the 1050ti there (it's about twice as fast as the 2200G's iGPU)

Okeyish, the FX6300 is horrible, I'm sorry Jow Forums trolled you into buying one.

I haven't bought it

/thread

FX series is like 8 years older. Just buy Ryzen 5 or something you pleb. Keep in mind a 1050ti won't run any game which came after 2016 acceptably.
For a future proof budget build,try this
Ryzen 2600
Any B350 motherboard or a x470 motherboard if available
GTX 1060 6GB
Any 8GB ram with at least 3000mHz
Any 1 TB Hdd
Any 128gb ssd

You can skip the ssd for now, this is most future proof, shits on intel in multi core, amd says support for it will be until 2020, gaming can be done in 1080p without sacrificing frames, can handle VR if you want.
If you just want a budget build for now get an i3 8100/ i5 8400 or any low end ryzen(the G ones) with a 1050ti.

Anything production I would recommend ryzen but if you're really dead set on intel I'd recommend i7 k coffeelake and avoid kaby at all cost
Also recommend a phanteks cpu cooler maybe the 12PE or a bequiet equivalent

Just keep in mind you're going to spend a fortune in intel with mobo, chip and a good cooler

Pentium G4000 or some shit.
You literally need about 0 processing power.

>Intel user that doesn't even consider Ryzen for multi-tasking
Why bother helping you?

Ryzen 2000 series. Notably either 2600X or 2700X, depending on budget. If you can add a little (or buy on combo deal) the 2700X is 8 core/16thread which will help for multithreaded editing as you describe. Add to that a X470 chipset motherboard from Asus, msi, gigabyte. Preferably Asus.

As others have said, Intel not worth it overall. Kaby is older gen and even Coffeelake isnt worth it unless you are overclocking on single threaded performance stuff . Ryzen 2700X gives you more performance overall plus comes with a decent cooler.

Disabling meltdown and spectre patches hasn't done much to performance for me, unless there's stuff that I can't undo.
Ryzen is better value overall if you're not an autist like me that values single core heavily.

ryzen, you fucking faggot.

Disabling meltdown and spectre patches hasn't done much to performance for me, unless there's stuff that I can't undo.
Ryzen is better value overall if you're not an autist like me that values single core heavily.

Kaby Lake became useless, unless you buy a 7700k for less than 100, stay away.

I run cubase with a ryzen 1600 and it works great. I'm sure the 2600/2600x would be even better. Just make sure you get lots of ram

Disabling meltdown and spectre patches hasn't done much to performance for me, unless there's stuff that I can't undo.
Ryzen is better value overall if you're not an autist like me that values single core heavily.

Attached: 1524539129758-g.png (786x1186, 236K)

Wow what the fuck. I was getting 502 gateway errors earlier. Sorry about that