Discussion AMD Ryzen MegaThread! FAQ and Resources

Page 35 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar


I have been for days saying the next:



People at AT forums pretended that disabling SMT was THE solution for the gaming problem of RyZen and TechSpot tested this hypothesis, demonstrating that average gains are negligible. Aka SMT is not the reason for the gaming issue on RyZen.
 


I don't follow all what Joker does or says, but in past days, when people noticed that the conclusions of his 'review' were plain wrong because the GPU was running at 99% of load, he replied to the criticism via tweeter pretending that 99% of load on a GPU was not a bottleneck, but a problem with v-sync. Yeah, most people laughed...
 
Dejavu ... taken from actually a Tom's Hardware US (.com) post (solved).
Here is 2017 again and again. AMD - ASUS enabling profiles.
I am gonna head from 3600 mhz Rams cl 15 ... 16 gb. The performance of the CPU will be bound to it and the GPU choice of course ...

Anyway this is the example of what is going to happen and today is taking out at least 10% of the performance out of the AMD.
I hope that the Watt issue that leaves even if the machine is at 50% of its usage, sucking like 100% used, will be solved too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0lQjIEeXFE

Here was ASUS pulling out some stuff for its MOBO.
So far MOBOs are on shortage so I guess is a hot time for Mobo companies to work on availability /commercial\production\ and SW .. lot of work.

Do you think G skill is a good brand (all brands including this one are optimized for intel etc) will the same be optimized for ASUS am4 sockets etc or will come new rams brands or models .. so it's better to wait?

TECH IN AZ ... thanks for that Review.. it rocks.
 
Besides many of us can't understand this language, scottish accent, I can, and this guy is doing exactly what I was suggesting some posts before. (3 days ago)
But I guess many since I am a noob but I have a really intelligent head and an intuivity that can out perform most of writers and readers here nobody got this.

I got to that point by reading most of your good opinions which are very helpful, but really, this is the point I was making out.
Please publish this video that besides its very unique accent voice tells an amazing clear series of facts searching right there in those ARCHIVEs (THAT DO EXIST TO BE CONSULTED).
If you watch this video your head will clear out all the dirt ...

Good bye ... for now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylvdSnEbL50
 


i5s are not even the recommended gaming processor anymore. Seriously...4 core i7s are what people are recommending for high end gaming.

As for enthusiast gaming, that depends, does it not? I intend to go 4K this time around, and I may run CF Vega GPUs to do 3 monitors...(still undecided about multi-monitor...to be honest...)

1440p Ryzen is fine, the differences are not substantial enough to warrant paying more for a 7700k. If you only play at 1080p...then maybe you look at a 7700k. I would only say sure if literally all you did was gaming, not capture software, no streaming, and no additional apps in the background. Simply because the 7700k is very nearly bottlenecking at 1080p in many games, and Ryzen has enough cores it would not impact performance in the same way.

Additionally...the 1% and 0.1% low FPS numbers are typically in favor of Ryzen, meaning a much smoother overall experience in spite of a 15-20% deficit in frames compared to a 5 GHz 7700k.
 
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5xw4a4/computerbase_1800x_dolphin_benchmark_vs_mine/

Some updated dolphin emulator info. I know some here like that quite a bit.

This one shows he ran dolphin emulator and got much better than computerbase.de. Actually, his results were almost 15% better...
 


Interesting video thanks for that !

AMD claim 64% IPC improvement over excavator... No doubt about it the CPU is a beast, it may be getting hindered slightly by slow level 3 cache (among other things that is) but that can be easily fixed. I still believe they are sitting on a golden ticket.
 
I am trying to understand if this pair of G skills will be ok for the 1700 Ryzen or for the 1600x Ryzen...
Could you tell me if they will be implemented by the MOBO? In this FORUM of G skills is totally not mentioned really... it's crazy!
RAM DDR4 16GB PC 3600 CL15 G.Skill (2x8GB) 16GTZ are they going to run at 2100 mhz or I am actually going to be able to run em at 3000 AT LEAST? Maybe I will need time some bios is developed?
---------------------------------------------------------

--Just wanna tell that WIN 7 will be supported - check here.
https://www.techpowerup.com/230291/amd-readies-ryzen-platform-drivers-for-windows-7

This is important news. Since on AMD FX, GTAV was never actually an investment of DEVS, now AMD seems to be interested in putting people to work on OLDER STUFF, which is not only respectful but is actually understandable since AMD before (we all did ) knew that AMD had a OLDER\OBSOLETE on BIRTH platform and so it was very hard and expensive to bring people to work on it and backward stuff.

If as stated in that video - AMD now was going to work just on GTA VI (let's say) that would be a huge error. (not really learning from "past actions is one").

If AMD is gonna work with this logic... also future (in 1 year or 2) adopters of AMD ryzen (AND THAT HAD NO COMPUTER TODAY) will have a place in this "Saga" opened by Ryzen.
In all the environment today from culture to business the OBJ number one is OPENING NEW MARKETS, reaching new publics that were "handicapped" or had issues to get reached because of a lack of investment of course.
If AMD reaches out for those, like me, that until today (& next months) -before movin to ryzen- had 12 years pentium ***** 4 ,(by working on prices, investments, lettng me play 2012 to 2016 games or use older softwares) well, it means I will love them.
Intel will need to get back ethical or get out from consumer market. It means Intel will need to reshape their quality to a less commercial stance to a more HUMAN approach to the singularity citizens ... because, after all WE DO CARE.
 
Sorry if this has already been asked, but it appears that I can't search the thread. Has anyone here actually tried virtualization on Ryzen? I'm specifically looking for VMware ESXi reports, but info on other hypervisors would be helpful. This would seem to be a killer app for a chip with 16 threads.
 


Without a doubt its going to be a golden ticket, maybe not for pure gamers but for AMD as a company and for anyone with the intelligence to invest with AMD now while the stock has ticked down a little before it goes way up when Naples releases. Naples will be Zen's server processors and Intel currently controls 98% of the lucrative server market. The gaming market is pocket change when compared to the revenue of the server market. Ask yourself this, look at all the benchmarks out there, look how Ryzen outperforms the i7 6900K in workstation benchmarks - do you think the server market is going to give two craps that Ryzen doesn't run video games at 1080p in DX12 as fast as it should? With all its amazing workstation performance Ryzen is going to take away huge chunks of the server market from Intel and that is going to net them a lot of profit. Once Naples makes it "splash" into the server market AMD stock is going to go up like it never has before.
 


Personally I loved that guys accent, I which I had that accent instead of my "backwoods" accent😀

The biggest problem when debating technology like this- especially when it is this new and everything - RAM, motherboard, and processor are all on a new technology- is everyone thinks they know how it should be tested and how it should be running and even though it just released if it can't do this now then it never will points of view. Personally I agree with "Scotty" I think that if you are going to test it on 1080p then you should be testing it using all Ultra settings. I mean to be honest with ourselves are any of us buying a $300+ processor and $500+ GPU going to run it on low settings? I would rather see how it runs at the settings I would be utilizing, and saying I don't have a 4K monitor (yet) I'm very interested in 1080p Ultra settings. I would love to see more "fact checking" to see if testing utilizing lower settings is truly a good indicator of how the same processor will run i the future with better GPUs. If its found that it is mostly groundless then why are we testing that way? I would like to see more proof that testing utilizing low settings at 1080p accurately shows how it will perform in the future.
 


That's half the point. Ryzen is perfectly fine as a gaming processor today. I'd say it's great, even. But, as juanrga said (and my mind conveniently forgets it all the time), if you purchased an FX 8150 instead of an i7 2600k at the time, even if the FX was playable then, it isn't today, and the i7 is. Someday games will get more demanding, and "playable" will become "unplayable", while "great" will become "good". And then you will want that top-notch CPU from yesterday delivering mainstream performance.
 


It does run games and it will run games...it's not just the cache latency that is causing problems there are other optimizations that can be done even the game developers agree on this.
An I believe it will run games faster when optimized, an with new BIOS's an scheduling fixed etc... All these things will add up I'm sure..

But you are right.. Naples i'm sure is going to be savage...

Ryzen has really strong integer and floating point, an really good IPC... I think these optimizations might do more than people are willing to let themselves believe at the moment... Fool me once an all that..

I mean they are sending out over 1000 dev kits.. an working with everyone they can on this. It's plain to see the love they have invested in this chip. Their hearts and minds are in it. An they are highly motivated to make it a success.

I can see Ryzen becoming a success in the long run. It is just the first generation let's see what they can do for the CPU... an if that's not enough they will speed it up and replace the level 3 cache not a doubt in my mind..

If needs be they will even produce it on a different node that can run much faster..

Everyone needs to try and remember their is nothing wrong with the design quite the opposite actually...
It's a beast...

It's actually first time in a very long time that AMD has released an architecture with this much potential.
 


I never dealt much with Bulldozer, I never had one and actually started building custom PCs very close to the launch of Piledriver so my experience with AMD is based on Athlon (owned), Phenom II (owned), and Piledriver. Of the 3 both the Phenom II and Piledriver (my PC right now is powered by a FX 8370) are still able to play even modern games and in the case of my FX 8370 on high to Ultra settings and is far from "unplayable". Yes you get better gaming out of the i7 2600K but both processors are still playable and which ever one you have both are due for upgrading at this point in time. I know guys still rocking the Phenom II 6 core processors that are saying the same thing- games are still playable, but its time for an upgrade. In your example both processors are still currently playable and both are so dated that they now need to be upgraded. By the time the "weaker" processor isn't playable anymore - 4, 5, 6 years down the road does it even matter any more? You just got a lot of life out of it and even its "better" counterpart is very dated and in need of upgrading as well.
 


Ryzen supports virtualization features. Even the consumer grade chips, per the reddit AMA from Robert Hallock.

Also, to anyone curious...Ryzen also supports HDCP 2.2 and PR 3.0 DRM for 4K netflix streaming.
 


You said,"i5s are not even the recommended gaming processor anymore."

Intel is going to release new Intel 8th generation so i5 will have hyper-threading feature later this year. that is what I read it on Intel's plan on news. I assume i5 will be back with recommendation for gaming. But i5-7600k still strong and long time for 1080/1440p with decent graphic card. Also, I believe Ryzen 5 will challenge i5.

-DG
 
another issue is Intel will be releasing 8th gen core chips this year, which is said to be %15 faster than previous chips. while AMD has just released a new chip barely on par with intel 6th-7th gen, with the release of the new series AMD will be falling short again.

So AMD has again some rough times ahead. They will be strugling with devolopers, also will be releasing new drivers and BIOS updates and when they finally have a stable product ready for the market, will face a new opponent. This can cause AMD to loose its edge they have today.

Right now they may be selling a lot of product yet a lot more people like myself will be waiting to see the final results to make a purchase. I have been purchasing AMD chips since Athlon and I will again bu a ryzen chip in the next months but not before I see the platform is stabilized by means of operating system, BIOS and software updates.
 


Perhaps so, but it doesn't like ESXi 6.5. "Pink screen of death." See below:

https://www.servethehome.com/amd-ryzen-with-vmware-esxi-a-pink-screen-of-death/

From reading the article, it seems ESXi will need a kernel update to support Ryzen (much like Linux+KVM.) I hope I don't have to wait for ESXi 7.0.
 


RyZen 1080x doesn't outperforms the 6900k. Overall it is behind the 6900k despite having a clock advantage. This clock advantage is a consequence of AMD pushing the clocks to the limit, which reduced the user overclock. An overclocked Broadwell can reduce the clock gap or even increase the gap because it overclocks better.

Also the 1080x is close to the 6900k when including GPU-like workloads, which favor throughput over latency. Server applications prefer latency over throughput. That is why Blender or Handbrake have GPU ports to accelerate the application, but the immense majority of the server applications aren't accelerated by GPUs.

Server guys care about specific server applications or about standard benches as SPEC. I myself estimated the SPECint_base2006 scores for Ryzen, both in a optimistic scenario and in a realistic scenario

RyZen @ 4.0GHz = 43

Haswell @ 3.9GHz = 44

RyZen (OPT) @ 4.0GHz = 47

But this is for a single die. Naples is a MCM4 approach and it will have extra latency and thermals when compared with single-die Xeons. I am convinced that RyZen will be much more popular among enthusiasts than among server/HPC guys. The more optimistic expectations from market analysts agree with my vision. And they were made before the launch.
 


The thing will Bulldozer (and offsprings, like Piledriver) is that it wasn't a good CPU for lightly-threaded work from the beginning. Ryzen is a beast in every metric, except games, which have been optimized for Intel for the last many years. Let software catch up and you have a very strong CPU, unlike Piledriver.



Sooooooooo Intel is actually reducing the price of the i7, and also downgrading the name, to keep the performance tag on the i7 (which, soon enough, will start from 6 cores, I'm sure of that). Also, expect i3 to receive 4 cores without HT. Intel will play the price game in a very clever way, just wait and see.



So let me clear it up for you: Ryzen is very good, buy it. 😉
 



Again you miss the point- if the SMT issue is *fixed properly* (i.e. not just by disabling it altogether)- then you would get a net gain in performance. That is because you wouldn't need to disable it (tests show that disabling HT on Intel doesn't improve performance in the same titles- so the issue isn't with SMT as a whole but rather how these specific games are dealing with SMT on Ryzen). The only reason it averages out to no gain *right now* is because the method of 'fixing it' is an imperfect workaround that doesn't work in all cases- a proper patch (either to Windows or directly to the games) would net the same gains without the inherent downsides of the current workaround.

Not that I'm saying the uptick that will result from this is going to change the overall standing by a huge amount, but it will improve the average performance of Ryzen across games by a measurable amount. It's one of a number of things that should imrpove performance going forward.

Also reguarding performance of higher core count processors in games is a really interesting thread on reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5xx0o7/gamersnexus_game_selection_is_important_but_how/

I think the reddit user there makes a very important point- the methods used to test 'gaming performance' by the review sites is not representative of *multiplayer online gaming*- which is where these higher core count processors shine. It's understandable *why* the review sites use this methodology (to make the test repeatable and fair between parts) but it's also very important to understand the limitations. I've seen this in other titles- when you factor in high bandwidth network connections to multiple users the number of threads required does increase quite a bit- to the point that Core i5 4 thread parts that appear to provide perfect frame rates in most benchmarks seriously choke, and even 8 thread i7 parts start to hit hiccups in minimum frame rates. In those scenarios higher core count parts from both sides suddenly become considerably more consistent. I think there is a real argument for 6 core / 12 thread parts here- it's just the testing scenarios used by most testers don't highlight these situations due to it being almost impossible to easily create a totally repeatable scenario.

Edit: Just to reiterate a point I made earlier- the key thing to understand is exactly what the 'bottleneck' is that the lower resolution tests are showing with Ryzen. That bottleneck being *draw call performance* (as all the tests are taken in single player scenarios). The issue with that is there is more to gaming than just draw calls. The more I'm reading on this the more I'm convinced it's better to take a 6 core / 12 thread (or higher) core count part at moderate clocks over a very high clocked quad / 8 thread part if you play mainly multi player titles. The Battlefield series, modern RTS titles and so on all benefit from more threads when you are playing online. I think game tech reviewers need to find a solution to this as they are consistently showing information which is frankly misleading to consumers- yes an i5 at very high clocks can push more fps out of a high end gpu in a purely single player environment but it's going to choke when you jump into a scenario with lots of players- whereas something like a Ryzen 7 or I7 hex core would be able to maintain the same performance that you get in single player thanks to having the thread capacity to tackle the extra load.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom