You may still be able to sell your Intel chip and board for more used than the AMD stuff costs new. If so and you feel like switching I'd say go for it.
AMD Ryzen CPUs will launch by March 3
- Thread starter TC McQueen
- Start date
Wolf Akela
Member
Speaking of emulators, wasn't there an issue with AMD processors running worse than they should be? Can't remember if it was Dolphin or PCSX2.
Or preorder where you can cancel / not pick up.
Papacheeks
Banned
People in here are saying 4.0+ and up are pipe dreams on air for these to hit?
I want to say that they can reach 4.00ghz on air with proper cooling, but anything above may be a stretch.
Guess we have to wait a week.
I also have a 6700k and if Ryzen is really all it's cracked up to be, its resale value is gonna plummet
If I was sure Ryzen was going to be great, I'd sell it asap
I think earlier in the thread overclocking on water or air was pretty much "confirmed" to be non existent unfortunately
Emulator performance is what I'm worried about too.
Papacheeks
Banned
That makes no sense. Especially that one of the selling points for their Motherboards was that they all have the ability to over clock.
If you're really budget strapped, you could both look into buying a 6-core Xeon x56xx processor on the cheap from eBay for your 1366 motherboards. That's what I did for around $70cdn, overclocked it to 4.2GHz and gained a huge boost in multicore performance. That said, if I got a reasonable boost from a tax return I would seriously consider a R7 1700 setup...
Stop! I'll take it 😘
Eh not really.
$500 to £ with VAT is £480ish excluding any shipping or import fees.
The £ is still shit.
RenegadeXV8
Banned
Although it may end up being, true, I don't really think we can confirm anything of that sort until reviews are out.
D
Deleted member 59090
Unconfirmed Member
You're good for another 3 years at least with what you got. Unless you really want and AMD CPU there shouldn't be any reason for you to switch. Obviously wait for benchmarks as we don't know it for a fact yet.
Duxxy3
Member
The 1300 and 1400X are 4c/8t.
I wonder how a 1400x would compare to a 6600k in gaming. Would be very impressive if the 3 series kept up with the i5's at all.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
What the poster was saying is that they don't have much potential to overclock, not that you aren't able to do it.
So the rumor was they don't have much more you can squeeze out of them.
Burgess_101
Member
It's cheaper for me to just buy it from a German site and get it sent to my wife.
Save about £20, wahey.
opticalmace
Member
Any idea why the big TDP difference between the 1700 and 1700x? Clocks don't seem too much different.
Do we know what the "X" means yet? Thanks.
Do we know what the "X" means yet? Thanks.
Wolf Akela
Member
Do we have a timeline for the 1600X?
We don't. It doesn't stand for XFR apparently but anything is a rumor at this point. Rumors and leaks are so vast that I've even seen a pic of a 16 c 16 t 1800x @ 3.6 on cinebench doing 2300.
What A Time To Be Alive
Member
I dont know, I can see them hitting about 4.4/4.5 GHz.
I think the X variants may hit a little higher since I think Linus confirmed their binned.
BBQMan
Member
Waiting for the final phase of the AMD hype cycle to kick in (disappointment). I feel that AMD has been choosing its battles a little too carefully when it comes to demos and benchmarks out there. Hell they didnt even doing a gaming test up against a 6700k-7700k because it would most likely show some not so great results. I mean yeah you could argue more cores! more threads! but AMD has been doing that song and dance for years. Unless there is a cheaper and just as fast or faster alternative to the 6700K/7700K hell even the 6600K/7600K then its all going to come crumbling down in the end.
Dont be disappointed nothing revealed so far shows something better at that CPU's price point.
Dont be disappointed nothing revealed so far shows something better at that CPU's price point.
cyen
Member
Does a 6900k crumbles because its slower than a 7700k gaming wise?
What A Time To Be Alive
Member
The point is that they are going to be close to the 7700k in terms of single threaded. Everyone already knew this coming in and all tests currently point to that.
I think your being a little to skeptical.
If all you are doing is gaming then the Skylake/Kabylake processors are better but this is clearly aimed at the HEDT segment. The only reason we are comparing Kabylake to these processors are because of how close they are in price.
BBQMan
Member
Well the 6700K performs better in game than it and its cheaper. So why would you choose to compare you gaming CPU against a competitors more expensive and least likely gaming choice?
In the end for gaming is going to be price for performance. And its going to be hard to knock at least the 6600 out.
This, so much.
It's crazy how much people are just willing to take AMD on their word and buy into this blindly.
We have no idea how gaming is going to perform compared to a 7700K.
They've only shown two tests: one with RX480 SLI against a 6800K, and one with a Titan X against a 6900K - both at 4K resolution.
That seems kind of fishy. When you're comparing CPU performance in games, you don't do it at 4K.
I'm also really curious to see how a 1700(X) is going to compare against a 6800K in an AVX-heavy workload like video encoding for example.
Suddenly when they're testing video encoding, they start to compare against a 7700K instead of the 6800K/6900K.
AMD have been very selective with what they've been showing in benchmarks, and have prevented the press from releasing their own testing until they are actually shipping.
I'm still very excited about the possibility of inexpensive 8-core CPUs that, even if they don't end up being faster, should be competitive for many types of workload at a much lower cost.
And while we aren't there yet today, games are certainly heading in the direction of needing more than four cores.
It's only an upgrade if your workload supports it.
You could go from a 6700K to a 1700X and find that performance is worse in the games/applications that you use.
Having more cores is not automatically better - especially when they have half-rate AVX2.
That's probably why the 1700 was only 15% faster than a 7700K in their Handbrake test, despite having twice as many cores.
XFR only pushes the clockspeed up by 100MHz according to LinusTechTips.
That suggests these are not going to be strong overclockers.
What you might be able to do is have the chip boost all cores to its max turbo speed at the same time though, even if you can't push the clockspeed much beyond 4.1GHz.
cyen
Member
Well, its faster because of clockspeed not IPC (as far as we know), it has double the cores for the same price, overall will be a faster process for all tasks including games that have over 4 threads, why would anyone choose a 7700k?
What A Time To Be Alive
Member
I feel like the 1300 may be able to compete in that category in terms of price for performance but we'll when the tests come out for that specific SKU.
BBQMan
Member
Because the 7700K is cheaper and in tested real world samples is faster in gaming than the 6800K. Now AMD's latest Ryzen 1800X gets real close and surpasses the 6800K at 499$.
cyen
Member
We dont have that data yet.
opticalmace
Member
Tempted to preorder a 1700 or 1700x for non-gaming... wish I knew which one!
Yup, that's where I'm at.
BBQMan
Member
Based on the data they have shown us, ie the Battlefield demo the 1800X priced at $499 is under 10% faster in that game versing a 6800K which mind you is $449. Now we already know a 7700K(@ $349) out performs the 6800K in gaming from real world samples. IMO these current chips are not what you are looking for, for gaming. The value for money when building a gaming PC still heavily leans into Intels court after this release.
Pop-O-Matic
Banned
You'll be able to get an overclockable Ryzen 4C/8T processor with only slightly worse single-threaded performance for over $100 less than the 7700k.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Just got an email from Microcenter concerning these. Holy shit they're expensive!
BBQMan
Member
We haven't seen any of the performance demos from those chips only the ones being released today. I wont hold my breath this happens every AMD release.
They're incredibly cheap next to what they're going up against.
These are the highest end processors of the release.
Mid and low range will be out soon.
I think you mentioned this to me before. I went and bookmarked some, but I hesitated knowing that I may have some other options soon. I want to see where the Ryzen 5s come in before I do anything else.
cyen
Member
That is not true, at least for me and i mainly game, this is not a buldozer where more cores does not equal better overall performance.
Some games will benefit more cores over pure speed like frostbite engine, and going forward we will have more threads beeing used not less. So if you want to stick with a cpu 3 or 4 years going forward a 1700x is a better bet than a 7700k.
I would never buy a 7700k if IPC is within 10% range if i have double of cores.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
Yeah, if I was in the market I would be looking at the 1600X. I bet it will perform very well and have the best value for gaming.
TC McQueen
Member
I totally agree.
That said, it sucks that ASUS is the only one that put out an official thing about their AM4 mobo features:
http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/02/22/ryzen-am4-motherboard-guide/
I'm not planning to jump in on the R7s, but it'd be nice to have as much info about the mobos as possible early, because then I could start making preparations for my R5 purchase.
Pop-O-Matic
Banned
Everything we have right now suggests Haswell/Broadwell IPC for these, if not better.
Unless the X surprises me, I actually expect the 1600 to be the best value for gaming if you're willing to manually overclock.
BOOTY ME$$IAH
Member
Would the 1700 be a substantial upgrade from my current i5-3570k???
I've been considering upgrading my rig for the past few months but I'm still not sure when would be a good time to pull the trigger on it
I've been considering upgrading my rig for the past few months but I'm still not sure when would be a good time to pull the trigger on it
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
Ah, I looked at the lineup and I didn't realize there is a 1600. In that case I agree with you, I don't think the X's features will be worth the cost.