Aztechnology
Member
Sure with extremely low clock speeds, weak per core performance and lack oh hyper-threading. I mean, even the lower ends here could have pretty substantial impacts for consoles on that end.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Ryzen could be PC Gaming's much needed shot in the arm.
- Thread starter JohnnyFootball
- Start date
Sure with extremely low clock speeds, weak per core performance and lack oh hyper-threading. I mean, even the lower ends here could have pretty substantial impacts for consoles on that end.
Unknown Soldier
Member
PC gaming reached record revenues in 2016. It is literally the biggest it has ever been and it's growing like crazy still. PC doesn't need any additional shots in the arm.
admiraltaftbar
Member
I still remember AMD's claims about bulldozer which tempers any excitement I might feel about an AMD CPU release. I'll believe it when I see it (when people actually have the CPUs).
Aztechnology
Member
For competition, it absolutely does.
ISee
Member
It doesn't need a shoot in the arm OP.
Old intel CPUs are a lot slower in comparison to new models, most people (and games) just don't need the extra power.
My old 3570k (4.3ghz) was even bottlenecking my 980 in some games and I was regularly getting drops in GTA V, Witcher 3, Batman AK and (especially) Just Cause 3.
3570k/980 said:
6700k/980 said:
That's of course an extreme example, the gain was only about 30% in Witcher 3 and GTA V but it is still there.
You're also on an i7 3770k. Old i7s seem to hold up extraordinary well, probably because multithreading is getting more attention this days but a modern 7700k is a lot faster then a 2600k in Watch Dogs 2 (+53%). Most people just don't notice it because 60fps is the norm and even the 1% low of 54fps isn't really a dealbreaker here.
Of course there are other examples like BF1 where extra CPU power doesn't seem to influence performance at all (or much).
But I agree in one point: Ryzen could bring much needed fresh wind into the cpu market. Competition is always good. Bring it on AMD and hopefully people on old i5s are going to upgrade.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Not if you know what competition actually is.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=225528040&postcount=695
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Didn't AMD bring him back on side after his tantrum by giving him review access/hardware freebies etc? He's different now compared to 12 months ago.
RipperGrim
Member
Isn't that exactly what OP wants? cuz you just described how competition works, if Intel release better products and lower current prices because of AMD then AMD have done their job as far as I'm concerned.
Maybe enough people complained about his bullshit that he finally decided to act like a human being?
This doesn't prove anything given context. Sales parity aside, with the lack of any real contender from AMD, intel has kept prices real high and performs gains in the high-end low. We've made leaps in power draw as it seems Intel switched to seeing ARM as their main competitor.
The CPU landscape on PC needed a shake up
LordRaptor
Member
Yes, that's what I'm saying.
I appreciate that they exist.
I just don't buy their products.
This is where I'm at right now. I'd love to see how well it performs before jumping in. I do need a new PC and a well-priced but powerful cpu would be welcome.
There are benchmarks out already, it's looking very promising
Shadowhaxor
Member
Reads to me "cheaper" solution. PC gaming is doing just fine. Ryzen, if it performs as reported, will be a return of AMD in comparison to its state now.
LordRaptor
Member
I mean, I know you're joking, but I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Intel have fucking quantum crystals or some shit proof of concepted and ready for production, but are just drip feeding incremental improvements to their existing lines to milk as much cash as possible.
Same as I wouldn't blink an eye if Ford had a 100% clean renewable engine that runs on tap water in a vault somewhere for when the oil runs out.
shark sandwich
tenuously links anime, pedophile and incels
Oh come on. I'm excited for for Ryzen too, but it's not going to do anything gaming-wise that an equivalently-priced Intel chip can't do just as well.
Gaming, to the extent that it is CPU bound at all, is generally limited by single-threaded performance. And that is an area where Ryzen doesn't beat Intel. Go look at any gaming-focused review of Broadwell-E for proof that 4 fast cores beats 8-10 slightly slower cores in nearly every gaming benchmark, and in any case the difference is usually under 1%
Ryzen will be a shot in the arm for AMD and will be a popular choice for gamers. But, for gaming, it isn't a leap ahead of what we have already.
Gaming, to the extent that it is CPU bound at all, is generally limited by single-threaded performance. And that is an area where Ryzen doesn't beat Intel. Go look at any gaming-focused review of Broadwell-E for proof that 4 fast cores beats 8-10 slightly slower cores in nearly every gaming benchmark, and in any case the difference is usually under 1%
Ryzen will be a shot in the arm for AMD and will be a popular choice for gamers. But, for gaming, it isn't a leap ahead of what we have already.
dcx4610
Member
Exactly. What is does need though is to take advantage of PC hardware. CPUs are still woefully underused. Very few games take advantage of all cores and the full potential of CPUs so not to alienate people. I think at this point most people that PC game are fully aware of what they are getting into and don't want to be held back. Bring on Ryzen, competition, better prices and hopefully devs finally using the CPUs true power.
I would be, because that is utter nonsense. Quantum computing is a completely different paradigm, a Consumer Quantum Computer is an oxymoron.
The Futurist
Member
Didn't realize PC gaming needed a shot in the arm.
I guess if you love AMD for whatever reason, this is exciting.
Not really sure what people think a new CPU is going to do.
Competition is good though.
I guess if you love AMD for whatever reason, this is exciting.
Not really sure what people think a new CPU is going to do.
Competition is good though.
tearsintherain
Member
Yeah, more competition is gonna be good but this won't really change anything. PC gaming is in a good space, the only real issues I'd say are crappy ports of AAA games (but indie gaming more than makes up in volume), the whole cdkeys issue where if you want a big AAA game at the cheapest price at launch you are gonna be involved with some shady shit, and how every other nvidia driver release seems to be buggy as hell.
brunomartynhak
Member
As an AMD fanboy, but owner of a i7-6700k, I agree.
Nothing much to see here, just stuff getting cheaper, which, yes, is great, bu not revolutionary.
Youd be silly to make any decisions or conclusions from the current rumours. The only thing that mighe happen is that prices drop a little. Intel may not even bother since if its still the fastest, then its still the fastest and a lot of people just want that.
Lets wait for the chips to land.
And who to say Intel has not been sand bagging, their next chips could be mighty impressive and be even more expensive.
Lets wait for the chips to land.
And who to say Intel has not been sand bagging, their next chips could be mighty impressive and be even more expensive.
Exactly.
I'd be happy if Intel just stopped wasting so much mainstream die on an integrated GPU I don't want to use.
I view this as a good thing mostly for people who use the HEDT platform for more cores.
I say don't want to b/c my motherboard randomly decides to boot to that sometimes and I have to swap my cable.
I view this as a good thing mostly for people who use the HEDT platform for more cores.
shark sandwich
tenuously links anime, pedophile and incels
6600k will beat Ryzen in most gaming benchmarks. Don't know why you'd even think about switching if all you do is gaming.
Bring the cost down of a 4-6 core OC'able machine with decent IPC by $100-$200 would be a good start.
metareferential
Member
Is it really?
If you need to upgrade and are worried about prices, I guess you have a pretty old cpu. And you can get a great performing one without spending a thousand dollars on it.
What even is this sentiment?
If Ryzen delivers like it looks like it's going to in price/performance, you're gonna get dramatically (6900k perf, a $1000 CPU) more performance than a 7700k for almost the same price ($350).
It's not just about gaming--that doesn't fully utilize the threads given to it as is now--it's about getting a LOT more machine for your money. And hopefully putting the spark back on Intel to do the same
uncredited male
Member
If competitive we probably get some lower prices so that is nice.
psn
Member
50% at best, 10% at worst between a 2600k and a 7700k. And in many games, the 6 or 8 core CPU's from Intel are getting crushed by their 4 core counterparts. The CPU market just sucks for >144Hz gamers. My 6700k @4.9 GHz struggles in many games, a 6 or 8 core might be slower in games than my 6700k, so upgrading makes no sense. I'm 90% CPU limited in games.
There should be a way to just disable the whole integrated graphics in the bios. Should stop it bothering you.
shark sandwich
tenuously links anime, pedophile and incels
OP is specifically about gaming.
Unknown Soldier
Member
The reason their quad and dual-core CPUs have iGPU is two-fold.
The first reason is that iGPU is a value-add for customers. If the customer doesn't want the iGPU, they can just turn it off in the BIOS. But unless they are playing games, the iGPU is perfectly fine for daily home and office PC use and saves the need to spend on an additional external GPU.
The second, rather more important reason, the reason no one understands, is that the dies of Intel CPUs have now become too small to not have an iGPU if there's only 2 or 4 of them. Yes, the iGPU is also occupying space because the CPU dies have become so small that they cannot effectively dissipate their own heat and will crack from thermal stress. This is why there is no need for iGPU on current 6 and 8-core Intel processors, there's enough surface area there that this isn't an issue. Going forward, as Intel dies continue to shrink, they will need to put iGPU on HEDT processors too for the same reason.
So yes, iGPU is actually there for very good physical reasons.
Intel isn't Nvidia. The strategy you describe is typical for the latter not the former. They can and have fucked up. Remember Netburst?
And more price/performance benefits even that.
Buggy Loop
Gold Member
Just remember that, using AMD's efforts to bring a competitive CPU in the market only for the opportunity to jump on cheaper intel CPUs, is not really helping change what has happened to the market in the past decade, you're only supporting a company that was overpricing and sitting on their laurels for years now. If AMD's ryzen sales are crap, don't complain in another decade from now that it's stagnating.
The prices could use a shot in the arm.
Ryzen's product stack shows a dramatic downward shift in pricing we've only seen on the GPU side.
If XFR is better than people expect, cost efficiency gains for other parts in the computer will add more value to a machine console owners are leery about price wise.
opticalmace
Member
Well it shouldn't be too much longer, maybe May-June for Vega. The 460-480 products are already pretty competitive in the lower cost segment(s).
Makoto-Yuki
Banned
i have a 6700K which is more than enough for me but what I'm thinking is will AMD be able to keep up the pressure on Intel? Right now it seems Intel are bringing forward Coffeelake and will no doubt need to adjust their prices if what we've seen of Ryzen is true. By that I mean a £300-400 CPU can do just as well as a £1000-1600 CPU.
Intel consistently releases new CPU's...haswell, broadwell, skylake, kabylake, cannonlake, coffeelake, icelake, tigerlake...
Ryzen looks promising but when did they last release any new CPU's? will they have new CPU's out again in a year or two or will they wait another few years? I really don't think AMD can truly compete and put the pressure on Intel so I'll hold out with my 6700K and upgrade in 2018/2019. Right now I am looking at Icelake as it'll be the first 10nm desktop cpu's. I don't see AMD having anything out at that time that will be better than Intel.
I'm not hating on Intel. I'd love if AMD could force Intel year after year but I see Ryzen only doing well in the short team. Just forcing Intel to up their game but in 2-3 years they will again be allowed to set whatever prices/specs they want until AMD return again.
I am not expecting much from Vega. I expect the 490+ cards will be similar to Pascal and slightly cheaper but not worth upgrading for anyone already on a 1070/1080/Titan. Nvidia could easily just push out a refresh or completely new models and they've won again.
Intel consistently releases new CPU's...haswell, broadwell, skylake, kabylake, cannonlake, coffeelake, icelake, tigerlake...
Ryzen looks promising but when did they last release any new CPU's? will they have new CPU's out again in a year or two or will they wait another few years? I really don't think AMD can truly compete and put the pressure on Intel so I'll hold out with my 6700K and upgrade in 2018/2019. Right now I am looking at Icelake as it'll be the first 10nm desktop cpu's. I don't see AMD having anything out at that time that will be better than Intel.
I'm not hating on Intel. I'd love if AMD could force Intel year after year but I see Ryzen only doing well in the short team. Just forcing Intel to up their game but in 2-3 years they will again be allowed to set whatever prices/specs they want until AMD return again.
I am not expecting much from Vega. I expect the 490+ cards will be similar to Pascal and slightly cheaper but not worth upgrading for anyone already on a 1070/1080/Titan. Nvidia could easily just push out a refresh or completely new models and they've won again.
Yeah maybe, it's more the X70/X80/X80ti segment I'm talking about. Somehow I got zero hope AMD will compete in the near future.
Yeah, Vega is coming soon and if it does what the RX480 did to the midrange market, that'll be a nice price/performance boost too.
I'd say the AMD's extremely competitive in the midrange right now, more than just good. I just grabbed an 8gb MSI RX480 off of Jet.com for $184
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
What's this? AMD competitive in the non-integrated CPU market?
Is there a thread on this? I haven't paid attention to AMD CPUs in probably 10 years or more.
Is there a thread on this? I haven't paid attention to AMD CPUs in probably 10 years or more.
Your count is way off. Haswell and skylake are new. The ones directly after them are refreshes on a die shrink and IIRC Intel has thrown in the towel and will continue to refresh with cannonlake.