Discussion AMD Ryzen MegaThread! FAQ and Resources

[-Fran-]

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

This is interesting to read. So there's weight to the claims then.

You can do "blind tests" with people you know and ask them to test a game or two and tell you what they think.

Also, thanks for sharing your impressions. I think they add a lot to the discussion, since they are first hand impressions.

Cheers!

 

[goldstone77]

As a note on IPC: Ryzen definitely has a stronger SMT implementation then HTT, which will certainly make IPC look better in any multithreaded benchmark (when comparing the same physical/logical setups). For pure single-threaded benchmarks, Intel is still 15-20% ahead.

This is probably an argument in favor of Intel beefing up HTT a bit.

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

jdwii tell me the truth. Is Ryzen as bad ass as it looks on paper?

 

[jdwii]

As a note on IPC: Ryzen definitely has a stronger SMT implementation then HTT, which will certainly make IPC look better in any multithreaded benchmark (when comparing the same physical/logical setups). For pure single-threaded benchmarks, Intel is still 15-20% ahead.

This is probably an argument in favor of Intel beefing up HTT a bit.

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

jdwii tell me the truth. Is Ryzen as bad ass as it looks on paper?

I've been running some benchmarks at a stock 1700 for gaming Ryzen is a great processor i can't see a difference in FPS compared to my Haswell chip and i own a 144hz 1440P panel i will note that its a G-sync panel and yeah it does feel smoother.
Fallout 4 1440P Ultra without the close to useless texture pack is almost always running at 90+FPS and i also played GTA5 i get similar results I'll run any benchmark that people want if they want comparisons with their setup. I also had my friend come in and see it and he couldn't beleive it i was expecting ryzen to feel worse then my haswell chip in gaming at least.

For fun i ran cinebench ha ha
R15
http://postimg.org/image/jiy9q24xb/
11.5
http://postimg.org/image/ulivk4lq5/
My guess is Ryzen would have looked better if it released 3 months after it did i mean even today there's is a new BIOS update with improved memory support for my board. Yesturday Amd updated their chipset drivers.

 

[goldstone77]

As a note on IPC: Ryzen definitely has a stronger SMT implementation then HTT, which will certainly make IPC look better in any multithreaded benchmark (when comparing the same physical/logical setups). For pure single-threaded benchmarks, Intel is still 15-20% ahead.

This is probably an argument in favor of Intel beefing up HTT a bit.

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

jdwii tell me the truth. Is Ryzen as bad ass as it looks on paper?

I've been running some benchmarks at a stock 1700 for gaming Ryzen is a great processor i can't see a difference in FPS compared to my Haswell chip and i own a 144hz 1440P panel i will note that its a G-sync panel and yeah it does feel smoother.
Fallout 4 1440P Ultra without the close to useless texture pack is almost always running at 90+FPS and i also played GTA5 i get similar results I'll run any benchmark that people want if they want comparisons with their setup. I also had my friend come in and see it and he couldn't beleive it i was expecting ryzen to feel worse then my haswell chip in gaming at least.

For fun i ran cinebench ha ha
R15
http://postimg.org/image/jiy9q24xb/
11.5
http://postimg.org/image/ulivk4lq5/
My guess is Ryzen would have looked better if it released 3 months after it did i mean even today there's is a new BIOS update with improved memory support for my board. Yesturday Amd updated their chipset drivers.

Yeah, they rushed to get it out. And it's such new technology it's going to take time to work out all the bugs anyway. I had the feeling that the gaming performance differences were going to be mostly academic. Hell you can overclock that thing 1 GHz still!

 

[jdwii]

Spoiler

As a note on IPC: Ryzen definitely has a stronger SMT implementation then HTT, which will certainly make IPC look better in any multithreaded benchmark (when comparing the same physical/logical setups). For pure single-threaded benchmarks, Intel is still 15-20% ahead.

This is probably an argument in favor of Intel beefing up HTT a bit.

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

jdwii tell me the truth. Is Ryzen as bad ass as it looks on paper?

I've been running some benchmarks at a stock 1700 for gaming Ryzen is a great processor i can't see a difference in FPS compared to my Haswell chip and i own a 144hz 1440P panel i will note that its a G-sync panel and yeah it does feel smoother.
Fallout 4 1440P Ultra without the close to useless texture pack is almost always running at 90+FPS and i also played GTA5 i get similar results I'll run any benchmark that people want if they want comparisons with their setup. I also had my friend come in and see it and he couldn't beleive it i was expecting ryzen to feel worse then my haswell chip in gaming at least.

For fun i ran cinebench ha ha
R15
http://postimg.org/image/jiy9q24xb/
11.5
http://postimg.org/image/ulivk4lq5/
My guess is Ryzen would have looked better if it released 3 months after it did i mean even today there's is a new BIOS update with improved memory support for my board. Yesturday Amd updated their chipset drivers.

Yeah, they rushed to get it out. And it's such new technology it's going to take time to work out all the bugs anyway. I had the feeling that the gaming performance differences were going to be mostly academic. Hell you can overclock that thing 1 GHz still!

Gonna play around with that using the wraith cooler at 100% my CPU never touches 50C in gaming and during benchmarks its at 49-51C, we all know Amd likes to use more voltage then it needs for most chips.

 

[goldstone77]

Recommendations BEST CPU's looks like its Ryzen all the way!
http://www.techspot.com/bestof/cpu/

 

[con635]

Spoiler

As a note on IPC: Ryzen definitely has a stronger SMT implementation then HTT, which will certainly make IPC look better in any multithreaded benchmark (when comparing the same physical/logical setups). For pure single-threaded benchmarks, Intel is still 15-20% ahead.

This is probably an argument in favor of Intel beefing up HTT a bit.

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

jdwii tell me the truth. Is Ryzen as bad ass as it looks on paper?

I've been running some benchmarks at a stock 1700 for gaming Ryzen is a great processor i can't see a difference in FPS compared to my Haswell chip and i own a 144hz 1440P panel i will note that its a G-sync panel and yeah it does feel smoother.
Fallout 4 1440P Ultra without the close to useless texture pack is almost always running at 90+FPS and i also played GTA5 i get similar results I'll run any benchmark that people want if they want comparisons with their setup. I also had my friend come in and see it and he couldn't beleive it i was expecting ryzen to feel worse then my haswell chip in gaming at least.

For fun i ran cinebench ha ha
R15
http://postimg.org/image/jiy9q24xb/
11.5
http://postimg.org/image/ulivk4lq5/
My guess is Ryzen would have looked better if it released 3 months after it did i mean even today there's is a new BIOS update with improved memory support for my board. Yesturday Amd updated their chipset drivers.

Yeah, they rushed to get it out. And it's such new technology it's going to take time to work out all the bugs anyway. I had the feeling that the gaming performance differences were going to be mostly academic. Hell you can overclock that thing 1 GHz still!

Gonna play around with that using the wraith cooler at 100% my CPU never touches 50C in gaming and during benchmarks its at 49-51C, we all know Amd likes to use more voltage then it needs for most chips.

jdwii could you be a star and run a test for me? Its just a stupid theory, you use nvidia? If so could you run latency checker or latencymon on both systems amd and intel with same card and drivers?

 

[jdwii]

https://youtu.be/sciuiEcrnzg?t=962

This review at 16Min basically confirms what i noticed and coming from Haswell which is slower then Kabylake in IPC and frequency yeah i see the same as him and i guess he also thinks Ryzen is smoother. I have a guess besides memory to why Ryzen might feel smoother and that is with a 4790K at least during GTA5 my CPU was always running at 75+ usage but with ryzen 1700 its only around 35% maybe that is why during certain parts of the game Ryzen just has the extra resources for it to not mess up gameplay.


But if GTA5 and Fallout 4 is giving me high frame rates at only 3ghz on my 1700 i think from personal experience perhaps people saying ryzen sucks for gaming is a bit to much even more so when they claim a I5 is fine.

I'm a person of logic(and people in this thread will tell you that i think PD is crap for gaming and i owned that chip too and i can prove it) and i will say on paper Kaby-lake looks better for gaming but from actual gameplay (Logical fallacy of Anecdotal evidence) i can't say i do not own kaby or skylake i built machines for friends with them, but i never owned them.

I will say Amd fans who think 8 cores+16 threads will become the normal for gaming soon and ryzen will beat kabylake in FPS i personally don't think that will happen at best the R7 will become even with the I7 7700K in 3-5 years(EDIT from a FPS standpoint at least). I seen it with PD i seen it with the Athlon II x4 vs the Phenom II x3 and X2.

But i can't prove the future and anyone who claims they can with 100% evidence is trolling themselves and anyone who believes them. That said i personally would NEVER buy the 7700K over the 1700 just not gonna happen sorry just like i wouldn't buy the I5 over the R5 and i bet the I3 vs the R3 will even be more obvious that Amd has the better deal.

 

[jdwii]

Spoiler

As a note on IPC: Ryzen definitely has a stronger SMT implementation then HTT, which will certainly make IPC look better in any multithreaded benchmark (when comparing the same physical/logical setups). For pure single-threaded benchmarks, Intel is still 15-20% ahead.

This is probably an argument in favor of Intel beefing up HTT a bit.

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

jdwii tell me the truth. Is Ryzen as bad ass as it looks on paper?

I've been running some benchmarks at a stock 1700 for gaming Ryzen is a great processor i can't see a difference in FPS compared to my Haswell chip and i own a 144hz 1440P panel i will note that its a G-sync panel and yeah it does feel smoother.
Fallout 4 1440P Ultra without the close to useless texture pack is almost always running at 90+FPS and i also played GTA5 i get similar results I'll run any benchmark that people want if they want comparisons with their setup. I also had my friend come in and see it and he couldn't beleive it i was expecting ryzen to feel worse then my haswell chip in gaming at least.

For fun i ran cinebench ha ha
R15
http://postimg.org/image/jiy9q24xb/
11.5
http://postimg.org/image/ulivk4lq5/
My guess is Ryzen would have looked better if it released 3 months after it did i mean even today there's is a new BIOS update with improved memory support for my board. Yesturday Amd updated their chipset drivers.

Yeah, they rushed to get it out. And it's such new technology it's going to take time to work out all the bugs anyway. I had the feeling that the gaming performance differences were going to be mostly academic. Hell you can overclock that thing 1 GHz still!

Gonna play around with that using the wraith cooler at 100% my CPU never touches 50C in gaming and during benchmarks its at 49-51C, we all know Amd likes to use more voltage then it needs for most chips.

jdwii could you be a star and run a test for me? Its just a stupid theory, you use nvidia? If so could you run latency checker or latencymon on both systems amd and intel with same card and drivers?

I wish i could if anyone has a 4790K and wants to run the test for me i can then compare it with my new Ryzen chip but i sold my build for money to buy this setup so i could test Ryzen. I do however have a full set of pre benchmarks on haswell that i kept to compare with ryzen. Also i have the low 1% FPS scores for GTA5+Fallout 4 and CIty skylines and Simcity and several other CPU intensive games. I really wanted to push Ryzen to the limit to see the true scores.

 

[juanrga]

As a note on IPC: Ryzen definitely has a stronger SMT implementation then HTT, which will certainly make IPC look better in any multithreaded benchmark (when comparing the same physical/logical setups). For pure single-threaded benchmarks, Intel is still 15-20% ahead.

This is probably an argument in favor of Intel beefing up HTT a bit.

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

Average and minimum framerates at stock

We can check that a 3.4GHz Kabylake (3.8GHz turbo) is 24% faster than a 3.4GHz RyZen (3.8GHz turbo) on average and 9% faster on minimum framerates despite it is 16 threads vs 4 threads.

Yes, your hypothesis is correct. Fallout 4 is very sensitive to RAM. That is the reason why you perceive better gameplay on RyZen with memory overclocked to 2933MHz vs Haswell with memory at 1866MHz. Haswell i5 got up to 22% faster FPS from 1600MH to 2400MHz

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-the-best-pc-hardware-for-fallout-4-4023

http://www.techspot.com/review/1089-fallout-4-benchmarks/page6.html

Fallout 4 isn't particularly heavy on system memory, using less than 4GB of RAM for the most part, and it is also light on VRAM using a little over 2GB at 1080p. Interestingly, however, Intel's Core processors benefit massively when paired with high-speed memory in Fallout 4, as we saw minimum frame rates increase by almost 70% when going from DDR3-1333 to DDR3-2400.

In a first guess, your former Haswell chip would have increased the performance by about 15% if you had replaced 1866 RAM by 2400.

 

[-Fran-]

As a note on IPC: Ryzen definitely has a stronger SMT implementation then HTT, which will certainly make IPC look better in any multithreaded benchmark (when comparing the same physical/logical setups). For pure single-threaded benchmarks, Intel is still 15-20% ahead.

This is probably an argument in favor of Intel beefing up HTT a bit.

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

Average and minimum framerates at stock

Spoiler

We can check that a 3.4GHz Kabylake (3.8GHz turbo) is 24% faster than a 3.4GHz RyZen (3.8GHz turbo) on average and 9% faster on minimum framerates despite it is 16 threads vs 4 threads.

Yes, your hypothesis is correct. Fallout 4 is very sensitive to RAM. That is the reason why you perceive better gameplay on RyZen with memory overclocked to 2933MHz vs Haswell with memory at 1866MHz. Haswell i5 got up to 22% faster FPS from 1600MH to 2400MHz

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-the-best-pc-hardware-for-fallout-4-4023

http://www.techspot.com/review/1089-fallout-4-benchmarks/page6.html

Fallout 4 isn't particularly heavy on system memory, using less than 4GB of RAM for the most part, and it is also light on VRAM using a little over 2GB at 1080p. Interestingly, however, Intel's Core processors benefit massively when paired with high-speed memory in Fallout 4, as we saw minimum frame rates increase by almost 70% when going from DDR3-1333 to DDR3-2400.

Spoiler

In a first guess, your former Haswell chip would have increased the performance by about 15% if you had replaced 1866 RAM by 2400.

FPS doesn't explain "stutter" in it. You can have 10000 frames drawn all together at the very last mili-second of the second. That is why Toms and TechReport don't use FPS as the only measurement nowadays.

Cheers!

 

[goldstone77]

https://youtu.be/sciuiEcrnzg?t=962

This review at 16Min basically confirms what i noticed and coming from Haswell which is slower then Kabylake in IPC and frequency yeah i see the same as him and i guess he also thinks Ryzen is smoother. I have a guess besides memory to why Ryzen might feel smoother and that is with a 4790K at least during GTA5 my CPU was always running at 75+ usage but with ryzen 1700 its only around 35% maybe that is why during certain parts of the game Ryzen just has the extra resources for it to not mess up gameplay.


But if GTA5 and Fallout 4 is giving me high frame rates at only 3ghz on my 1700 i think from personal experience perhaps people saying ryzen sucks for gaming is a bit to much even more so when they claim a I5 is fine.

I'm a person of logic(and people in this thread will tell you that i think PD is crap for gaming and i owned that chip too and i can prove it) and i will say on paper Kaby-lake looks better for gaming but from actual gameplay (Logical fallacy of Anecdotal evidence) i can't say i do not own kaby or skylake i built machines for friends with them, but i never owned them.

I will say Amd fans who think 8 cores+16 threads will become the normal for gaming soon and ryzen will beat kabylake in FPS i personally don't think that will happen at best the R7 will become even with the I7 7700K in 3-5 years(EDIT from a FPS standpoint at least). I seen it with PD i seen it with the Athlon II x4 vs the Phenom II x3 and X2.

But i can't prove the future and anyone who claims they can with 100% evidence is trolling themselves and anyone who believes them. That said i personally would NEVER buy the 7700K over the 1700 just not gonna happen sorry just like i wouldn't buy the I5 over the R5 and i bet the I3 vs the R3 will even be more obvious that Amd has the better deal.

Spoiler

As a note on IPC: Ryzen definitely has a stronger SMT implementation then HTT, which will certainly make IPC look better in any multithreaded benchmark (when comparing the same physical/logical setups). For pure single-threaded benchmarks, Intel is still 15-20% ahead.

This is probably an argument in favor of Intel beefing up HTT a bit.

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

jdwii tell me the truth. Is Ryzen as bad ass as it looks on paper?

I've been running some benchmarks at a stock 1700 for gaming Ryzen is a great processor i can't see a difference in FPS compared to my Haswell chip and i own a 144hz 1440P panel i will note that its a G-sync panel and yeah it does feel smoother.
Fallout 4 1440P Ultra without the close to useless texture pack is almost always running at 90+FPS and i also played GTA5 i get similar results I'll run any benchmark that people want if they want comparisons with their setup. I also had my friend come in and see it and he couldn't beleive it i was expecting ryzen to feel worse then my haswell chip in gaming at least.

For fun i ran cinebench ha ha
R15
http://postimg.org/image/jiy9q24xb/
11.5
http://postimg.org/image/ulivk4lq5/
My guess is Ryzen would have looked better if it released 3 months after it did i mean even today there's is a new BIOS update with improved memory support for my board. Yesturday Amd updated their chipset drivers.

Yeah, they rushed to get it out. And it's such new technology it's going to take time to work out all the bugs anyway. I had the feeling that the gaming performance differences were going to be mostly academic. Hell you can overclock that thing 1 GHz still!

Gonna play around with that using the wraith cooler at 100% my CPU never touches 50C in gaming and during benchmarks its at 49-51C, we all know Amd likes to use more voltage then it needs for most chips.

jdwii could you be a star and run a test for me? Its just a stupid theory, you use nvidia? If so could you run latency checker or latencymon on both systems amd and intel with same card and drivers?

I wish i could if anyone has a 4790K and wants to run the test for me i can then compare it with my new Ryzen chip but i sold my build for money to buy this setup so i could test Ryzen. I do however have a full set of pre benchmarks on haswell that i kept to compare with ryzen. Also i have the low 1% FPS scores for GTA5+Fallout 4 and CIty skylines and Simcity and several other CPU intensive games. I really wanted to push Ryzen to the limit to see the true scores.

Ryzen has better 1% and .1%. This because it has more cores, more resources. Look at the 5930k. Its going to make game play feel much smoother without all those low frame drops. Which is ultimately going to give you a better gaming experience!

http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2182-fallout-4-cpu-benchmark-huge-performance-difference
If you have bench marks lets match them up.
Also, http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6850K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-5930K/3606vs2578

 

[rgd1101]

Anyone see any benchmark with the new chipset driver?

 

[8350rocks]

As a note on IPC: Ryzen definitely has a stronger SMT implementation then HTT, which will certainly make IPC look better in any multithreaded benchmark (when comparing the same physical/logical setups). For pure single-threaded benchmarks, Intel is still 15-20% ahead.

This is probably an argument in favor of Intel beefing up HTT a bit.

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

Average and minimum framerates at stock

We can check that a 3.4GHz Kabylake (3.8GHz turbo) is 24% faster than a 3.4GHz RyZen (3.8GHz turbo) on average and 9% faster on minimum framerates despite it is 16 threads vs 4 threads.

Yes, your hypothesis is correct. Fallout 4 is very sensitive to RAM. That is the reason why you perceive better gameplay on RyZen with memory overclocked to 2933MHz vs Haswell with memory at 1866MHz. Haswell i5 got up to 22% faster FPS from 1600MH to 2400MHz

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-the-best-pc-hardware-for-fallout-4-4023

http://www.techspot.com/review/1089-fallout-4-benchmarks/page6.html

Fallout 4 isn't particularly heavy on system memory, using less than 4GB of RAM for the most part, and it is also light on VRAM using a little over 2GB at 1080p. Interestingly, however, Intel's Core processors benefit massively when paired with high-speed memory in Fallout 4, as we saw minimum frame rates increase by almost 70% when going from DDR3-1333 to DDR3-2400.

In a first guess, your former Haswell chip would have increased the performance by about 15% if you had replaced 1866 RAM by 2400.

No, there are tests on that sort of thing, it would have made about 4-6% difference...if that.

 

[jdwii]

Spoiler

As a note on IPC: Ryzen definitely has a stronger SMT implementation then HTT, which will certainly make IPC look better in any multithreaded benchmark (when comparing the same physical/logical setups). For pure single-threaded benchmarks, Intel is still 15-20% ahead.

This is probably an argument in favor of Intel beefing up HTT a bit.

Gamer i respect your statements why on earth am i seeing smooth gaming performance compared to my 4790K at 4.7Ghz in gaming?

This is weird i've been testing and re-testing but in Fallout 4 when a city or new location loads for example i feel a small stutter on my Intel build vs my 1700(at stock) at 2933mhz memory. The only guess i can come up with is 1866mhz that i have for haswell is to slow for my 1080.

Average and minimum framerates at stock

We can check that a 3.4GHz Kabylake (3.8GHz turbo) is 24% faster than a 3.4GHz RyZen (3.8GHz turbo) on average and 9% faster on minimum framerates despite it is 16 threads vs 4 threads.

Yes, your hypothesis is correct. Fallout 4 is very sensitive to RAM. That is the reason why you perceive better gameplay on RyZen with memory overclocked to 2933MHz vs Haswell with memory at 1866MHz. Haswell i5 got up to 22% faster FPS from 1600MH to 2400MHz

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-the-best-pc-hardware-for-fallout-4-4023

http://www.techspot.com/review/1089-fallout-4-benchmarks/page6.html

Fallout 4 isn't particularly heavy on system memory, using less than 4GB of RAM for the most part, and it is also light on VRAM using a little over 2GB at 1080p. Interestingly, however, Intel's Core processors benefit massively when paired with high-speed memory in Fallout 4, as we saw minimum frame rates increase by almost 70% when going from DDR3-1333 to DDR3-2400.

In a first guess, your former Haswell chip would have increased the performance by about 15% if you had replaced 1866 RAM by 2400.

Well i can prove with a video that i'm getting more FPS then that but i figured my slower memory was why it performed less with haswell. Lol i like that review site but they messed up on the 8350 using DDR4. Easy to overlook i guess.

 

[goldstone77]

Here are some benchmarks to look over.

http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2875-amd-r5-1600x-1500x-review-fading-i5-argument

 

[jdwii]

Overclocking ryzen is a lot of fun and Amd's software for it is actually not that bad at all! Currently trying to keep voltage as low as possible for temps while OC 3.4Ghz at 1.2V temps during cinebecch is below 60C same as my handbrake test of compressing an episode of the walking dead. This is all with the stock cooler at 100% which is pretty darn quiet to be honest. I'm picky to about noise all my fans in my case are Noctua fans

 

[jaymc]

Intel expects CPU prices to fall now that AMD's Ryzen is here

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3193149/computers/intel-projects-decline-in-chip-prices-and-amds-ryzen-is-one-reason.html

 

[randomizer]

But as prices rose last quarter it's merely a correction.

 

[juanrga]

FPS doesn't explain "stutter" in it. You can have 10000 frames drawn all together at the very last mili-second of the second. That is why Toms and TechReport don't use FPS as the only measurement nowadays.

Stutter is a latency problem when one or more frames take more time to render. Overclocking RAM reduces access latency and this can eliminate stutter if the bottleneck was memory. Check the graphs, specially the i3 numbers. Average increased by 25%, but minimum increased a huge 59%. which reduces the possibility of stuttering.

Well i can prove with a video that i'm getting more FPS then that but i figured my slower memory was why it performed less with haswell. Lol i like that review site but they messed up on the 8350 using DDR4. Easy to overlook i guess.

Yeah, there are some typos in the graph.

 

[juanrga]

Anyone see any benchmark with the new chipset driver?

Only official ones

 

[salgado18]

But as prices rose last quarter it's merely a correction.

But as prices were kept artificially high for the last 10 years, it's merely justice.

 

[randomizer]

But as prices were kept artificially high for the last 10 years, it's merely justice.

Somehow I don't think a "slight decline" is going to make up for years of price gouging.

 

[-Fran-]

Stutter is a latency problem when one or more frames take more time to render. Overclocking RAM reduces access latency and this can eliminate stutter if the bottleneck was memory. Check the graphs, specially the i3 numbers. Average increased by 25%, but minimum increased a huge 59%. which reduces the possibility of stuttering.

Timings reduce latency, Mhz increase effective bandwidth. Isn't that the rule of thumb? Something that is bandwidth starved might not be latency sensitive at all. If you increase bandwidth, then you're talking about something different.

And it has nothing to do with what I said anyway. Increasing effective FPS (min or max) does not decrease the *chance* of stutter, it actually increases it! That is why it's important to measure how the frame generation is distributed along a benchmark run and then inversely correlate the information you get.

Cheers!

 

[goldstone77]

true latency (ns) = clock cycle time (ns) x number of clock cycles (CL)
http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/memory-performance-speed-latency
With Ryzen increasing RAM frequency decreases the latency between the CCX via Infinity Fabric, which uses RAM frequency as it's reference.