Jump to content

Recommended Posts

@scubbo Thanks, that's an interesting read. It's still a bit speculative in its conclusions but it certainly looks promising for AMD. They just might of caught Intel napping again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
And the benchmarks are in (all benchmarks here):
 
1080p gaming benchmarks - 3.9Ghz 8c16t vs 5Ghz 4c8t. That's very good for AMD.
Ryzen-R7-1700-vs-i7-7700k-Average-Gaming
 
And of course it kills at many other benchamrks:
585a4671_85881.png
 
6 and 4 cores Ryzen still has to release :D
Edited by banOkay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what @RipGroove stated, i'm sticking with my 4790k for the moment.  until amd implements the single thread technology as intel has.  in other news, my amd stock has gone down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very impressive. 3.9ghz vs 5.0ghz as well. Would like to see more sources/results though. Oh and Ryzen running a UE4 title ;). Many of them titles are well optimised for multicore which, let's be honest, should be the future so plays to AMD's advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what @RipGroove stated, i'm sticking with my 4790k for the moment.  until amd implements the single thread technology as intel has.  in other news, my amd stock has gone down.


People probably sold some shares for AMD :) anticipating this.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

lol ive had amd stock for almost 10 years, its been painful to say the least.  im hopeful though.

Edited by chaz69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

very nice, 16 threads and still amazing game fps at lower clocks --- wonder when/if ryzen will support ECC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/2/2017 at 10:47 AM, Major Trouble said:

Very impressive. 3.9ghz vs 5.0ghz as well. Would like to see more sources/results though. Oh and Ryzen running a UE4 title ;). Many of them titles are well optimised for multicore which, let's be honest, should be the future so plays to AMD's advantage.

 

This. I mean when I started playing Squad I was running an Athalon X4 880K (bumped up 860 basically) with a GTX 970. When V7 hit I was lucky to pull 15FPS. Switched to a basic I5 4690 on a cheap H97M Asus board and the difference was night and day. Explosions, animations, everything.

 

Despite the predictions about how soon gaming will move towards using more cores rather than relying on faster single core performance, right now most of the games I play, including this one, benefit from better single core performance.

 

Though ever since AMD announced the launch date on Ryzen seems all of the Intel CPUs are on sale, so now may be the time for a little upgrade. :D

Edited by Rayman1230

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I believe AMD has planned this launch for the future.  Just like CRT's are nearly non-use, I think most people will be on 4K in the next 5-7 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should keep an eye on the R7 1700, from what I have read so far it can be overclocked to 3.8 ghz with the normal wraith(air)cooler of AMD, hitting performance levels of an I7 6900k. (even out performing it sometimes)

 

Now remember the price of an Ryzen R7 1700 is about 329$ while the I7 6900k is over 1000$.

 

We have to see more benchmarks before really concluding I guess, but that looks promising.

 

EDT: put down the numbers from 3.9 to 3.8 ghz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

A lot of the reviews are conflicting. There are reviews that say that the Ryzen (I thought all of the just released CPUs) in single thread are way below the Intel CPUs, and there are reviews that state that the Ryzen can keep up with even Kaby Lake. It seems that various Motherboards are better than the others, and that a BIOS update also increases performance. AMD stated that they are going to release drivers to improve on the gaming performance on Ryzen, so you might have to wait for those to release and the benchmarks to be run with those updates. And to add to this, Ryzen CPUs use dual channel memory where Intel uses quad channel memory which also favours Intel in benchmarks where AMD can't keep up.

 

In addition to this, I saw benchmarks where the average FPS on Ryzen is well below the average FPS of Intel, but the minimum Ryzen FPS are significantly higher than the Intel FPS. Just to speculate, since AMD is fiercely fist deep in the consoles market, AMD might come back into gamers' hearts after the updates and after the next Ryzen iteration. But with what we have now it is just potatoes potatos, tomatoes tomatos. Ryzen ramms its "Hello world" straight through Intel its multithreading on occasion, but gets taken by Intel's multithreading in the other half of the benchmarks.

 

But everyone reaches the verdict: are you into rendering, multitasking and gaming, streaming and gaming, engineering, science? Then take the Ryzen, it is a mother intercoursing bargain. Are you only into gaming and your occasional school programs (excel, powerpoint, word) then take an i5 or an i7 for that matter. Be aware though, it might just be that Ryzen will be the rising sun on the horizon for the future of games/gaming.

 

I am running an AMD FX8350 at the moment with 32 GB of RAM which is great for large SolidWorks files, Matlab, COMSOL and some programming software, but an upgrade to Ryzen is imminent for me since I heavily use these programs and often the FX8350 just takes 50% longer than an Intel CPU would. Squad performance is not great with an FX8350 but would be absolutely better with an R1700 to R1800X. €580 CPU, €~250 Mobo, €250-500 RAM and still quite some dough over for an upgrade on my GPU. But then again, my PC is my work and not so much 100% my entertainment. If you only use your PC for education and entertainment (and have a lower budget), then you should take an i5/i7 or wait for the R5/R3 of AMD.

 

Oh and I'm not a fanboy for AMD, but to throw €1000-2000 for a multithreading CPU is just over the top. And I really like competition since it favors everybody and more people can get into building desktops for that matter.

 

TLDR: R7 is better than FX overall, if you can't wait for R5/R3 buy an i5/i7 since it is cheaper than R7 and immediately available. If you want more arguments to buy or not to buy then I suggest to read the whole text.

 

Oh and I am terribly sorry to not include any document/links/literature/reviews since I am going to play Squad on my half-free day. Sorry!

Edited by BaldadigeAnton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waiting to see if MB & software updates can tease more performance out of Ryzen. It's a new architecture and from reports it doesn't seem they are getting the best from it yet. It's born out in the fact the chips perform better with smt (hyperthreading) turned off showing that when threads are pushed to another core it really hampers Ryzen performance overall. MBs are experiencing teathing problems with stuff like ram not being able to operate at their best speed.

 

It seems the Ryzen launched a bit to early. I hope these initial problems don't turn people off of what is a fantastic effort to bring some competition to Intel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really want someone with a bit too much money in the squad community to be the Ryzen guinea pig. I would love to support AMD with their processors, but since squad is one of the few games I actually bother to play these days, I don't want to get burned by going that route when we know that a 6600 or 7600k would be a safe choice. 

 

Maybe the squaddevs will buy a ryzen based system and report the findings to us :P 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Motherboard vendors only had 3 weeks to prepare for launch, Windows drivers apparently aren't fully supporting Ryzen so we're seeing a big disparity in benchmarks. It's a brand new architecture, I'm happy to not be in the market for a new build right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Psyrus said:

-snip-

Maybe the squaddevs will buy a ryzen based system and report the findings to us :P 

 

Only if they get Paid to do so by AMD....Come on AMD,Squad will seperate the Men from the boys!. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should give one to Epic so they can make UE4 and all games based on it run better on their new CPUs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Monster cpus those ryzens damn amd has done it lmfao that performance thooooo :D:D:D 

 

Edited by MDInteractive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Ashes Of The Singularity gets a Ryzen update - this is what optimising for Ryzen does to the performance:

C8IeYIXUAAIH-t8.jpg

 

Quote

At the High preset (which is the setting that AMD used in its performance data for the press release), we see a 31% jump in performance when running at the higher memory speed and a 22% improvement with the lower speed memory. Even when running at the more GPU-bottlenecked state of the Extreme preset, that performance improvement for the Ryzen processors with the latest Ashes patch is 17-20%!

 

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Ashes-Singularity-Gets-Ryzen-Performance-Update

Edited by banOkay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@banOkay Very nice. I am glad to see good improvements for Ryzen when devs target it specifically. The only fly in the ointment is that Ashes Of The Singularity is the type of game that benefits from being able to spread the CPU load across many cores. Optimizing that plays to Ryzen's strengths no doubt and is probably the unexplained reason for it's significant gains in performance.

 

Unfortunately I don't believe such optimization is going to bring such big gains in games, such as Squad, with less opportunity to become more multi-threaded. Even a small boost is probably worth it though. AMD have to keep the pressure on Intel or we only get the slow incremental advances they had been turning out for the past few years. Win / win in my book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Major Trouble said:

@banOkay Very nice. I am glad to see good improvements for Ryzen when devs target it specifically. The only fly in the ointment is that Ashes Of The Singularity is the type of game that benefits from being able to spread the CPU load across many cores. Optimizing that plays to Ryzen's strengths no doubt and is probably the unexplained reason for it's significant gains in performance.

 

Unfortunately I don't believe such optimization is going to bring such big gains in games, such as Squad, with less opportunity to become more multi-threaded. Even a small boost is probably worth it though. AMD have to keep the pressure on Intel or we only get the slow incremental advances they had been turning out for the past few years. Win / win in my book.

 

You're mostly right, but if you look at synthetic benchmarks Ryzen is faster than Intel's 8 core that sells for $1k. Even single threaded performance is better and the difference between that and 7700K isn't that big (although 7700k is still obviously better at IPC). So despite a game not being multi-threaded well because Epic are jokers I think big gains can be seen here too, just not as big. People don't complain about their 6600k and that level of performance is achievable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, banOkay said:

 

You're mostly right, but if you look at synthetic benchmarks Ryzen is faster than Intel's 8 core that sells for $1k. Even single threaded performance is better and the difference between that and 7700K isn't that big (although 7700k is still obviously better at IPC). So despite a game not being multi-threaded well because Epic are jokers I think big gains can be seen here too, just not as big. People don't complain about their 6600k and that level of performance is achievable.

 

You are right that Ryzen has much better IPC than before but the focus still ends up that it's not as good as the 7700K, even if it's kicking lesser chips that are priced much higher. That is especially true when you can overclock the 7700K so well compared to Ryzen currently. There is a lot to like about AMDs new chips and I never expected them to even be as close as they are. They still need to get past all the new chip issues before stealing my money from Intel.

 

Though you might like this...

 

Edited by Major Trouble
Additional info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30.03.2017 at 5:35 PM, Major Trouble said:

 

You are right that Ryzen has much better IPC than before but the focus still ends up that it's not as good as the 7700K, even if it's kicking lesser chips that are priced much higher. That is especially true when you can overclock the 7700K so well compared to Ryzen currently. There is a lot to like about AMDs new chips and I never expected them to even be as close as they are. They still need to get past all the new chip issues before stealing my money from Intel.

 

Though you might like this...

 

 

Overclock i7 7700K ? "overclocks so well" ?

Man, those CPUs are so damn hot that even Intel is advising to ... not overclock the X series. 

 

http://www.pcgamer.com/intels-tells-core-i7-7700k-owners-to-stop-overclocking-to-avoid-high-temps/

 

You need to scalp i7s to get decent temperatures, and I'm not going to risk to kill such expensive CPU. Some i7700k chips are getting really hot even at stock clocks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×