AMD Ryzen 7 1800X CPU Review

[theyeti87]

I would like to remind everyone that competition is the best thing a consumer can ask for. There are familiar names in this comment section that regularly go out of their way to spew their misinformed, borderline toxic opinions about this company or that company.

Competition is good. Consumers win with the release of Ryzen, whether you buy that tech or not. Prices will be affected across the board.

 

[SpAwNtoHell]

Now we are talking amd welcome back in bussines price/performance ! Now please clean up the graphics side of things also!

 

[-Fran-]

I am not sure that catching up deserves kudos. When Intel launched Core 2, they didn't catch up to Athlon 64 they pounded Athlon 64. When Athlon 64 came out it pounded NetBurst. That deserves proper praise.

Catching up and matching does not merit that in my opinion.

Well, you still have to be fair to AMD here. They don't have the same R&D and resources that Intel has. They are the underdog not only because of perceived place, but because of money reasons. Yes, they got where they are now by themselves and yes they have made a ton of mistakes over the years that should have not happened, but Mr Keller's appointment was the best sign of good direction they gave and it's now been shown why. The team behind Zen really deserves kudos and a lot of congrats. And that's not even counting the process disparity GF has with Intel.

So yeah. We have to be happy and give them praise even on parity, since they bring competition back!

Hopefully AMD gets a better process to handle higher clocks.

Process is only half of the equation there, but yeah. I hope GF puts a really good process node for AMD soon. And yields!

Cheers!

 

[madmatt30]

Early adopter ?? Stick with the supplied wraith cooler & stock clocks

If you buy a 1700X or 1800X, there is no supplied cooler, you have to source your own just like you do with Intel's K-chips.

Yes I see mate,not 100% true though,just these preorders & early stock are WOF editions.
The next 2 weeks will see the retail drop with the 140w red ring wraith cooler as far as I know (at least as a chooseable buyer option)
This is a worry though for early adopters of the x chips,would seem the corsair series of AIO's are absolutely fine without the extra packers though.

 

[MCE2k]

Given the results I just may grab one for FEA and Solidworks use.

 

[jimmysmitty]

I am not sure that catching up deserves kudos. When Intel launched Core 2, they didn't catch up to Athlon 64 they pounded Athlon 64. When Athlon 64 came out it pounded NetBurst. That deserves proper praise.

Catching up and matching does not merit that in my opinion.

Well, you still have to be fair to AMD here. They don't have the same R&D and resources that Intel has. They are the underdog not only because of perceived place, but because of money reasons. Yes, they got where they are now by themselves and yes they have made a ton of mistakes over the years that should have not happened, but Mr Keller's appointment was the best sign of good direction they gave and it's now been shown why. The team behind Zen really deserves kudos and a lot of congrats. And that's not even counting the process disparity GF has with Intel.

So yeah. We have to be happy and give them praise even on parity, since they bring competition back!

Hopefully AMD gets a better process to handle higher clocks.

Process is only half of the equation there, but yeah. I hope GF puts a really good process node for AMD soon. And yields!

Cheers!

I am happy. I am glad we didn't see the poor marketing like BD had.

I am however a realist. There is a reason why I still have a 4670K and have not upgraded, because I don't need anything more yet.

At least pricing will be rattled a bit but my main concern is still if AMD will keep up with Intel or will we have to wait another 4 years before they drop something competitive. Because even with this Intel will continue as planned and release new CPUs, some with better IPC gains and others with better clock speeds.

AMD has to be able to keep up. I hop they can get higher clocks. That's the biggest issue.

 

[FormatC]

Given the results I just may grab one for FEA and Solidworks use.

I think, all this software can be improved or re-compiled, also for AMD. Rendering works well and if you are using slower VGA cards than this P6000, the difference will be even smaller. It is a perfect workstation solution, but we have to wait for full ECC support.

 

[cmi86]

So on launch day AMD has managed to provide 90% of the gaming performance that Intel provides with a mature architecture that they have been tweaking for several years.. Also AMD launch day has managed to offer 100% + of the computational through put at half the price of intel's matured and fine tuned architecture. Bring on those BIOS and microcode tweaks.

 

[cmi86]

I like my PC to be able to do everything at a high level. From basic browsing to gaming, to file serving to media creation, to encode/decode and everything in between while providing the best value possible. While intel is still stronger in a few aspects on launch day (which is very likely to change) These new Ryzen processors are the total package over all matching or besting intel for a considerably lower price at a given resource level.

 

[cmi86]

If the 8c/16t chips can hit 4.0ghz I am very excited to see what the 4c/8t chips can do. Should be much more of a fair fight for the 7700k. The R7 line is not meant to compete with 4c/8t intel offerings on single core perf. It as made to beat intels enthusiast x99 6c/12t and 8c/16t offerings in price and performance. Wait for the R5 and R3 lines if want mainstream competition for intel.

 

[WarWolverineWarrior]

Should've released a 4c/8t core sub $200 cpu to compete with Intel. Most people look for a $500 PC Build, not a $500 CPU.

 

[logainofhades]

Yea, for the multitaskers, Ryzen is a great choice. I wouldn't even consider an X99 rig, at this point. The 6800k is kinda irrelevant, now, and the 6900k costs too much.

 

[logainofhades]

Should've released a 4c/8t core sub $200 cpu to compete with Intel. Most people look for a $500 PC Build, not a $500 CPU.

Those are coming later. Just like Intel does, they are releasing the high end models first.

 

[ElectrO_90]

Toms using the email Intel sent them to try and discredit AMD a little more. As AMD Suggested certain games, Intel suggests certain games. In previous CPU reviews, Tom uses other games but this one, not one game AMD suggested.

I grant you other websites show similar gaming fps reviews, but they also show other games where AMD is beating Intel and if its not beating it, its a draw.

We know who sponsors Tom's website.....

 

[user99a]

I'm more interested in the 4/8 core Ryzen for gaming. Most games don't use more than a couple of cores. I'd like to see how the 1400X compares to the 7700K

 

[daddywalter]

I certainly did not expect AMD to release a new architecture that is better at business/professional computing than gaming, but that's exactly what they did. This is an early review, of course, and I expect we'll learn more as Tom's Hardware and other reviewers spend more time with the new processors and motherboards. For now, it looks like Ryzen is a good choice for anyone who needs a high-performance platform for business number-crunching. Add a decent graphics solution and it could be the best choice (for now, I'm sure Intel has something better in the pipeline) for photo and video editing. Lots of bang for the buck here. And as Ryzen becomes more readily available, a number of game publishers will undoubtedly rework their titles to take advantage of Ryzen's strengths.

Serious gamers may want to stick with high-end Intel processors for the time being. For scientific, accounting and image-editing machines, AMD is once again a viable choice -- especially when you factor in the lower cost we've come to expect from AMD-compatible motherboards.

Now I'm waiting for Intel to make its next move.

 

[Elenelt]

I'm more interested in the 4/8 core Ryzen for gaming. Most games don't use more than a couple of cores. I'd like to see how the 1400X compares to the 7700K

Hope someone will bench 1800x with 4 cores disabled
It's not 4/8 exactly though

 

[InvalidError]

Should've released a 4c/8t core sub $200 cpu to compete with Intel. Most people look for a $500 PC Build, not a $500 CPU.

If AMD released the 4C8T variants first, AMD would be getting substantially less value per wafer coming back from GloFo and might not be able to meet demand for high volume parts first. Availability of lower-end parts would also erode the market for the higher-end parts.

Starting from the top was the most logical choice due to finite production capacity.

 

[cabose369]

@POMPOMPAIHN

So they made a chip that bests the Intel processors on some of the productivity tasks. Thats fine. But the majority of people are not buying this processor to run productivity tasks. They are mainly buying it for gaming. And to charge slightly more (at least in CDN $) than a 7770K and lose to it in all gaming benchmarks is horrible. I'd concede that these results would be fine if it was $100-$150 less than a 7770K. But this just seems like a mistake. When Intel releases 10nm processors probably early next year what is AMD going to do? It took AMD 4 years of development to basically get on park with 1ish year old Intel CPU's in gaming performance. They are in trouble when the 10nm Intel CPU's come out.

 

[Onus]

I've read multiple Ryzen reviews today, and in their aggregate, they do not disagree in any significant way with Tom's single review here, so kudos to the authors for what amounts to an excellent distillation.
There's a lot to digest here. As someone who runs a "messy" system, having a lot of threads has its appeal. I also don't have any current AAA titles for which this chip is evidently not the best choice, and I really like the idle power numbers that have been reported.
Still, I'd be less than truthful if I didn't say I was a little disappointed, although I'm realizing that's likely unfair too as I suspect that it beats my i5-4690K in at least as many ways as it loses.

 

[Dennis_87]

remember in the amd demos....gaming and streaming at the same time. thats the 1800x shine than 7700k

 

[TJ Hooker]

@POMPOMPAIHN

So they made a chip that bests the Intel processors on some of the productivity tasks. Thats fine. But the majority of people are not buying this processor to run productivity tasks. They are mainly buying it for gaming. And to charge slightly more (at least in CDN $) than a 7770K and lose to it in all gaming benchmarks is horrible. I'd concede that these results would be fine if it was $100-$150 less than a 7770K. But this just seems like a mistake. When Intel releases 10nm processors probably early next year what is AMD going to do? It took AMD 4 years of development to basically get on park with 1ish year old Intel CPU's in gaming performance. They are in trouble when the 10nm Intel CPU's come out.

You could say the same thing about Intel's X99 chips. The point being that, even if you think people most people are buying them for gaming (source?), neither LGA 2011 CPUs nor Ryzen 7 are gaming oriented, at least not primarily. That's what Ryzen 3/5 will be for, and at least some of them probably will be at least $100-150 less than a 7700K currently costs.

 

[ravewulf]

The newest game I've got is Skyrim which works fine even on my old Athlon II x4 640. Most of what I do is video processing/encoding using AviSynth and x264, so I'm ecstatic to finially have an 8 core/16 thread CPU at a decent price. AMD is definitely back.

 

[Ne0Wolf7]

You put the video over the contents in this review... grr...

 

[Crashman]

The increased height of the backplate threaded holes should make no difference to mounting force as long as the holes bottom out at the same depth as before. Unless the heatsink's screws have been designed to seat against the backplate's studs instead of bottoming out in the hole as the end-stop.

Most of the results were predictable: few games and mainstream applications scale beyond a few threads, so Ryzen gets beat in practically all of them. For most threaded compute-intensive stuff though, Ryzen does quite well in applications that haven't been extensively optimized for Intel.

I won't talk about any cooler specifically, but I test coolers. And the most-popular method for "stopping" the screw is to use an extended shoulder that bottoms against the top of the backplate's inset nuts.

So what did intel ask and/or tell you to do when they contacted Purch/Toms about the AMD Zen/Ryzen reviews?
Did you do as they asked or told them no like other sites have reported?

My last message from Intel was regarding the rescaling of a block diagram, on 28 December 2016. The response reads:
"Thanks for sharing. No issues from me."
There will be no Pigeon Holing Sessions today 😀