Discussion AMD Ryzen MegaThread! FAQ and Resources

[wh3resmycar]

After one has someone has spent 1000 dollars for a machine (CPU component by Intel) that is (almost) reached by a starting price one of 500 THERE IS LIKE 0,000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance that that Human will refrain and say publicly to other people (or at least me that I am honest, but today being honest is equalized by people to be stupid) hey I did this huge purchase at the time now I feel betrayed by intel or things like that.

Nobody will ever be refraining from the money someone has spent on something. We are way to detatched from Nature and bluntness and honesty to say that. So I do expect actually much more intel people coming here and disrupting (or anywere the AMD work... and what they are doing also benefits Intel actually because it boosts the sales of everyone not just of AMD) ... REMEMBER THIS.

By paradox:

consider if AMD was reaching 1000 USD Intel piece and passing it all in all performance: what do you think people would say?
There would still be hundreds of not just fan boys but Stubborn dishonest people that just can't grow up and tell themselves, hey I have been brutalized by a company ...

Still a 500 Dollars CPU is OUT OF the MArket. As in MOST REVIEWS is stated correctly. We are paying 500 CPU that should be launched at way lower prices but why we do this?

I tell you why ? And it's not the fault of Intel this time.
It's because we are in Singularity Era and we are paying the huge risk these companies are paying for investing in long run projects in an era where Finance has (unfortunately) it all and decides who wins who dies just by naming it...

There is a whole need to go back to redesign our communities and systems and AMD is working that way, we need to ask this to Intel too. We are in singularity, if we want this singularity to go well we need to cooperate all together. This is not a game. It is very complex but it has HUGE opportunities.

Agree with cdrfk thesis ... very wise point and actually almost completely fact based if not completely.

ma'am those are quite long posts but it's not me who said the r7 1800x is the fastest 8core in the market. Ask Lisa Su (look up the video). the monogamer/streamer argument is quite invalid. i mean which is the majority? because if AMD's priority are the streamers who occupies a very small niche then there's something wrong with how AMD is being run.

i just hope the r5 6c can OC to 4.5ghz with ease to compensate for the 2 missing cores if i were to buy it if i'd go 1440p.

 

[ScrewySqrl]

What we seem to have with the 1800x/1700x is a workstation-class CPU at (high) Desktop prices. As the Tom's review says, this performance bodes well for AMD's new server chip.

The 1700 is priced like an i7-7700 (which is 3.5 base, 3.8 turbo), The 7700 will be stronger for games, but I suspect the 1700 will be a match or better in encoding, rendering, and related tasks. even then, we're till talking over 90 FPS in most games, so its not exactly a slouch.

 

[jaymc]

Well it has to be said it's a bit dissapointing in game benchmarks, apparantly game dev will hopefully release patches/updates for their respective titles. This may come quicker for some of the big titles and slower for others.

But after saying that it was never claimed to beat kaby lake. It gets an IPC of 158 on tomshardware review and 161 on anandtech, where does that put it exactly ? this is good right ??

It looks like it could do with some update's for games an maybe BIOS, I wonder if this is part of the reason Raja kudori announced they will be working with bethesda to help them utilize more cores in GPU's (an CPU's I hope).. It has to be said it's a contender an looks to have more potential to be unlocked from it.

 

[jdwii]

"In the Sniper Elite demo, AMD frequently looked at the skybox when reloading, and often kept more of the skybox in the frustum than on the side-by-side Intel processor. A skybox has no geometry, which is what loads a CPU with draw calls, and so it’ll inflate the framerate by nature of testing with chaotically conducted methodology. As for the Battlefield 1 benchmarks, AMD also conducted using chaotic methods wherein the AMD CPU would zoom / look at different intervals than the Intel CPU, making it effectively impossible to compare the two head-to-head."

What would Amd fans say if Intel did the same thing? I know i do not care for it when any company does this stuff

 

[-Fran-]

I think good early-review takeaways are:

1.- Ryzen is not Bulldozer all over again. This one is very important.
2.- AMD did not lie or over inflate things when presenting data (that I remember, at least; please correct me otherwise).
3.- Ryzen does look to be a very good fertile ground where AMD can actually squeeze more performance in the short term (Zen+ and all that), so the future does seem to be interesting in terms of competition. This is not even considering the nodes differences.
4.- Given early power tests by Toms, the APUs will be nice and it seems the 4C versions will be very good low end fighters.
5.- Poor overclocker. It hurts, but looks like it's already hitting the edge at 4.1Ghz boost. I don't think they'll go higher than that with Air.
6.- They still have a ton of quirks to sort, but at least it's not a failure.
7.- The SMT quirks might require new software versions. This is kind of a bummer, but I kind of expected this.

Cheers!

 

[jdwii]

Well it has to be said it's a bit dissapointing in game benchmarks, apparantly game dev will hopefully release patches/updates for their respective titles. This may come quicker for some of the big titles and slower for others.

But after saying that it was never claimed to beat kaby lake. It gets an IPC of 158 on tomshardware review and 161 on anandtech, where does that put it exactly ? this is good right ??

It looks like it could do with some update's for games an maybe BIOS, I wonder if this is part of the reason Raja kudori announced they will be working with bethesda to help them utilize more cores in GPU's (an CPU's I hope).. It has to be said it's a contender an looks to have more potential to be unlocked from it.

I'd hope after what happen with bulldozer and these so called magic patches never fixed anything that we would never have to hear about it ever again. This point i'm actually trying to figure out how it does so well in Cinebench? I want to test one myself results in Dolphin was pretty darn terrible compared to Intel.

http://www.legitreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ryzen-dolphin-1800x-2.jpg

1800X clock at 3.6Ghz 4.1Ghz turbo 454 score
6900 Clock at 3.2Ghz 3.6Ghz turbo 384 score

18% lower with a 12.5% clock speed advantage

Gonna test a few more does anyone have sandy-bride and willing to test the CPU at 4.0Ghz with Cinebench? I'l;l try and find a test myself to

 

[jdwii]

I think good early-review takeaways are:

1.- Ryzen is not Bulldozer all over again. This one is very important.
2.- AMD did not lie or over inflate things when presenting data (that I remember, at least; please correct me otherwise).
3.- Ryzen does look to be a very good fertile ground where AMD can actually squeeze more performance in the short term (Zen+ and all that), so the future does seem to be interesting in terms of competition. This is not even considering the nodes differences.
4.- Given early power tests by Toms, the APUs will be nice and it seems the 4C versions will be very good low end fighters.
5.- Poor overclocker. It hurts, but looks like it's already hitting the edge at 4.1Ghz boost. I don't think they'll go higher than that with Air.
6.- They still have a ton of quirks to sort, but at least it's not a failure.
7.- The SMT quirks might require new software versions. This is kind of a bummer, but I kind of expected this.

Cheers!

It's not bulldozer all over again as that processor had less IPC then their last CPU so I agree with number 1
Number 2 not so much I think they did possibly not lie but read my quote from gamernexus they did tricks to try and hide its lackluster gaming performance compared to the 6900 and i'd like to note they are trying to dismiss high frame rate gaming by saying just go to 4K which basically means you are GPU bound.

3. I agree Zen+ with more clock speed would even help a decent amount if they could possibly get it to 4.0Ghz stock with allowing slightly higher overclocks
4. Agree but a lot of the games tested actually could use more then 4 cores so I expect their 4 core CPU to look even worse in gaming not better and I do not expect much higher clock speeds maybe 200-300mhz more

 

[juanrga]

My intuition was correct: gamers wait for higher clocked, 6C or 4C versions, pro-sumers rejoice. Overall, not a gaming CPU (for now?).

There is no higher clocked 6C or 4C versions according to all the info available.

 

[-Fran-]

There is no higher clocked 6C or 4C versions according to all the info available.

Well, that sucks if it's the case.

And what about mobile parts? Is there anything announced?

Also jdwii, 4C versions will still have SMT, right? I can't remember the official product list, haha. Well, point here is that APUs and low end Ryzen will still have 8T? That is for the core scaling comment. Plus, games still like Hertz over Cores,l sadly. Let's see what Oxide brings to the table. Now, Vulkan (in DOOM, that is) looks to be quite comfortable with Ryzen.

Cheers!

 

[salgado18]

Let me put this here then, as I can't get my mind out of it:

Reviewers said that games deliver more performance with SMT disabled, but that doesn't happen in other threaded benchmarks. The only difference I can spot is that games don't use 16 threads, so:

what if Windows can't understand this new implementation of SMT, and throws 8 threads at 4 cores, instead of making a more balanced distribution? Could it be just like Bulldozer, where it didn't use the cores smartly until a patch solved the issue?

Which means (and I want to shout, but forum rules and politeness win): reviewers found problems in games, wait for patches and updates!

 

[jwcrellin]

Some people get all bent out of shape over the day 1 numbers.... Give it a month or 2 of bios and firmware updates before making any concrete decisions over performance.

 

[MaDDD]

I remember there being a similar sort of thing with Intel hyperthreading and stuttering in certain things, I believe it was a case of waiting for the things to be updated to take advantage of such things. Hopefully it is the same sort of scenario here and in a few weeks or months we will start to see more positives from SMT instead of negatives.

 

[salgado18]

There is no higher clocked 6C or 4C versions according to all the info available.

Well, that sucks if it's the case.

And what about mobile parts? Is there anything announced?

Also jdwii, 4C versions will still have SMT, right? I can't remember the official product list, haha. Well, point here is that APUs and low end Ryzen will still have 8T? That is for the core scaling comment. Plus, games still like Hertz over Cores,l sadly. Let's see what Oxide brings to the table. Now, Vulkan (in DOOM, that is) looks to be quite comfortable with Ryzen.

Cheers!

The R5 1600X and 1500X are 6c/12t, the R5 1400 and 1300 are 4c/8t parts (can't remember which one is X), and the R3 1200 and 1100 are 4c/4t.

 

[ScrewySqrl]

what we need to see is how the 6c/12t and 4c/8t compare with the 4c/4t i5s, and the 4c/4t compare iwth the i3s. If they remain competitive for a lower price, theyll be godo gaming chips. the R7s, right now, are not good gaming-first chips

Right now, pricewise i7-7700/7700K beats R7-1700 in games, but the 1700 is stronger in workstation-class tasks, while remaining competitive in gaming at 1440p. )less FPS, but hardly unplayable). Right now,. though, if gaming is your goal, the 1700 is the same price as the i7-7700 (and slightly less than the 7700K), but doesn't get the sme fps. Its better at workstation-class tasks though, so if you're doing streaming and video editing for a youtube, channel, it's great for that, but pure gaming, 7700 for now.

 

[juanrga]

Figured to be everything Juan was saying and some of the rest of us EDIT Amd even had me hyping at the end ha ha
http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2822-amd-ryzen-r7-1800x-review-premiere-blender-fps-benchmarks?showall=1

"AMD Ryzen R7 1800X Review: An i5 in Gaming, i7 in Production"

Very good description even in games like watch dogs 2 it does bad in since that game DOES use 8 cores well. BF1 looks slightly better. I was actually expecting 6900K like results in gaming.

Also note how it does well or wins in multithreaded tests and loses in single threaded tests JUST like we were trying to tell users. Who said that was impossible

Also 4Ghz normal overclock not 5 not 4.5

Just before launch I tweeted about a latency problem being the origin of bad performance on gaming and other latency-sensitive workloads

https://twitter.com/juanrga/status/836503836260990976

Reviews have now confirmed the problem was real. It seems that Ryzen is optimized for throughput and that is why it does fine in GPU-like workloads as Handbrake, Blender, or POV-Ray. I have been talking with some very knowledgeable people and no-one knows what is the origin of the latency problem. All points to some problem with the IMC or with the cache subsystem.

 

[James Mason]

Just before launch I tweeted about a latency problem being the origin of bad performance on gaming and other latency-sensitive workloads

https://twitter.com/juanrga/status/836503836260990976

Reviews have now confirmed the problem was real. It seems that Ryzen is optimized for throughput and that is why it does fine in GPU-like workloads as Handbrake, Blender, or POV-Ray. I have been talking with some very knowledgeable people and no-one knows what is the origin of the latency problem. All points to some problem with the IMC or with the cache subsystem.

So do you think it could fixed with "software" updates?

 

[Crumpet 1]

"an i5 in gaming" well.. as far as Max fps is concerned maybe.. Did you see those min fps though? DESTROYS the i5's

 

[8350rocks]

Well it has to be said it's a bit dissapointing in game benchmarks, apparantly game dev will hopefully release patches/updates for their respective titles. This may come quicker for some of the big titles and slower for others.

But after saying that it was never claimed to beat kaby lake. It gets an IPC of 158 on tomshardware review and 161 on anandtech, where does that put it exactly ? this is good right ??

It looks like it could do with some update's for games an maybe BIOS, I wonder if this is part of the reason Raja kudori announced they will be working with bethesda to help them utilize more cores in GPU's (an CPU's I hope).. It has to be said it's a contender an looks to have more potential to be unlocked from it.

Compared to a 6900K in gaming it does typically similar. I fail to see how that is at all disappointing?

 

[randomizer]

How disappointing. A side grade at best from Nehalem.

 

[juanrga]

Compared to a 6900K in gaming it does typically similar. I fail to see how that is at all disappointing?

I guess we must be seeing different reviews

 

[jaymc]

Well it has to be said it's a bit dissapointing in game benchmarks, apparantly game dev will hopefully release patches/updates for their respective titles. This may come quicker for some of the big titles and slower for others.

But after saying that it was never claimed to beat kaby lake. It gets an IPC of 158 on tomshardware review and 161 on anandtech, where does that put it exactly ? this is good right ??

It looks like it could do with some update's for games an maybe BIOS, I wonder if this is part of the reason Raja kudori announced they will be working with bethesda to help them utilize more cores in GPU's (an CPU's I hope).. It has to be said it's a contender an looks to have more potential to be unlocked from it.

Compared to a 6900K in gaming it does typically similar. I fail to see how that is at all disappointing?

Agreed... we would of all been delighted with that a while ago...

I'd love to know if this latency is fixable... thats a good question.. Has AMD made any statements about performance in games or latency ?

 

[Eximo]

Well it has to be said it's a bit dissapointing in game benchmarks, apparantly game dev will hopefully release patches/updates for their respective titles. This may come quicker for some of the big titles and slower for others.

But after saying that it was never claimed to beat kaby lake. It gets an IPC of 158 on tomshardware review and 161 on anandtech, where does that put it exactly ? this is good right ??

It looks like it could do with some update's for games an maybe BIOS, I wonder if this is part of the reason Raja kudori announced they will be working with bethesda to help them utilize more cores in GPU's (an CPU's I hope).. It has to be said it's a contender an looks to have more potential to be unlocked from it.

Compared to a 6900K in gaming it does typically similar. I fail to see how that is at all disappointing?

Agreed. It makes a lot of sense from a cost/performance ratio no matter how you look at it.

You can still buy the Intel HEDT platform with quad channel memory and all that. But if you want to save some money and aren't planning to use it as a professional time=money solution, it is great.

If you are purely gaming Intel has you covered for the time being. Gamers can still buy Ryzen and not be disappointed at all. Even if it is an i7-4770k level of gaming performance, well, that was fine. Ran my 1080 perfectly. That 6C/12T CPU is going to be quite appealing when it comes out.

 

[con635]

Surely the 4c8t ryzen will be the 'gaming' chip with similar performance as the 8c at half the price of the 7700k?

 

[James Mason]

Anyone here who preordered the Ryzens gotten any shipping info yet?
(watch me get mine 30mins after posting this)

 

[jaymc]

John Taylor, a spokesman for Advanced Micro Devices and vice president at Worldwide Marketing, told CNBC: "There are a few gaming oriented sites that have expressed some disappointment over gaming performance at low resolution. This is a matter of optimization by those games on Ryzen. The CPU performance shines through strongly in every CPU test reviewers have run."