Support NeoGAF

[Durante]

PC Games Hardware did exactly this test:

That's not really the test I wanted (which is a synthetic cache communication latency test from/to each core), but still interesting.

 

[Dinky Dino]

More curious at their response to the i5 6600k/7600k and the i3 for gaming. If they can put something decent out at under 200/150, that would be great for people wanting cheaper builds.

 

[opticalmace]

Unless you need x99 other perks (and since you are asking, you dont), I would go for the 1700x.

They're effectively the same. Big difference will be the price of the motherboards - Intel 2011-3 boards are significantly more expensive than AM4 ones.

Thanks. Good point about the motherboards, forgot about that!

Next question... is there any real reason to go for the 1700x over the 1700? The X doesn't seem like it offers much more for the additional cost. I currently have a 1700x on preorder with an X370 board, but I'm thinking about dropping it down to a 1700 and B350.

 

[Sectorseven]

Is games taking advantage of additional cores and threads going to be something that happens out of necessity or market share?

In other words, if very few people buy 6+ core processors, will there be less motivation to optimize for them?

 

[Steel]

Thanks. Good point about the motherboards, forgot about that!

Next question... is there any real reason to go for the 1700x over the 1700? The X doesn't seem like it offers much more for the additional cost. I currently have a 1700x on preorder with an X370 board, but I'm thinking about dropping it down to a 1700 and B350.

You're not playing the chip lottery for overclocking with the X, at least. But it seems likely you can squeeze X performance out of the 1700. You can overclock the X mildly on top of that, but the 1700 definitely seems like the better value.

Is games taking advantage of additional cores and threads going to be something that happens out of necessity or market share?

In other words, if very few people buy 6+ core processors, will there be less motivation to optimize for them?

The consoles have 8 cores so more games are using more cores lately. That being said, there are very few that use 8.

 

[hanspampel]

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/

everyone who want to go into more technical details should read this
and ehtomaz is kind of correct. 14nm LPP is a "low power" process
not worse than intel or tsmc. just different

 

[SRG01]

That is not what technical comparisons amd articles says about GF's 14nm.

Intel and TSMC are a step ahead the others in silicon process.

GF's 14nm is Samsung's 14nm LPP, which is equivalent to TSMC's FF+...

That's not really the test I wanted (which is a synthetic cache communication latency test from/to each core), but still interesting.

A part of me wonders if it's a speedpath issue due from the design of the fabric between the cores...

 

[CryptiK]

Is games taking advantage of additional cores and threads going to be something that happens out of necessity or market share?

In other words, if very few people buy 6+ core processors, will there be less motivation to optimize for them?

It'll happen naturally with new engines and major engine updates. Dontn expect it any time soon.

This is very much the same with what happen when the Q6600 rolled around. People were like jump on that it will be amazing its quad-core etc. The dual core version at a higher clock speed beat it for the whole product life in Gaming.

If you are gaming at the moment stick with Intel.

 

[tuxfool]

They're effectively the same. Big difference will be the price of the motherboards - Intel 2011-3 boards are significantly more expensive than AM4 ones.

Though I would say justifiably so, given 4 memory channels and more pcie lanes. For most people that doesn't matter much though.

 

[Locuza]

10% more clock or less power consumption is a hell huge for CPU/GPU... you can increase the base clock from 4.0Ghz to close 4.5Ghz on CPU or from 1.5Ghz to close 1.7Ghz on GPU.

It is a big deal between process.

I don't agree with the notion that 10% are "hell huge" and that the process node is "way behind" the others.
In comparison to Intel the answer is probably yes, in contrast to TSMC which is the only other alternative, no.

That's where Ryzen stands with 10% OC (Under 1080p):

https://www.computerbase.de/2017-03/amd-ryzen-1800x-1700x-1700-test/4/#diagramm-performancerating-fps-uebertaktet

 

[Steel]

It'll happen naturally with new engines and major engine updates. Dontn expect it any time soon.

This is very much the same with what happen when the Q6600 rolled around. People were like jump on that it will be amazing its quad-core etc. The dual core version at a higher clock speed beat it for the whole product life in Gaming.

If you are gaming at the moment stick with Intel.

I wouldn't be solid on that until Ryzen 5 relases. It probably won't exceed intel specs, but they have higher base clocks and likely lower temps with higher overclocking potential than Ryzen 7 at a much cheaper price than intel competitors. Price/Performance might be better at that end.

 

[kamspy]

More curious at their response to the i5 6600k/7600k and the i3 for gaming. If they can put something decent out at under 200/150, that would be great for people wanting cheaper builds.

I'm most curious about the $200 range too. I bought into the whole "buy more cores now for future performance" and I ran a 1055t 6 core Phenom II up until a couple months ago, though my performance would not have satisfied most PC gamers, it matched console performance on most games. I was able to thoroughly enjoy the first half of this console generation's games with it. Overall I got a lot of life from the chip but wouldn't say that my experiment deserves repeating. I'm neutral looking back on it.

I really tried to wait for the Zen. Lack of SSEE support was killing me with games and I found a 6600K for $199 with an additional mobo discount. No regrets with the benches we've seen so far. I'm curious to see how their $200 chip competes.

 

[StaSeb]

14.14 USD Price decrease 0.82 (5.48%)

Buy on the rumor, sell on the news!

 

[ezodagrom]

I wouldn't be solid on that until Ryzen 5 relases. It probably won't exceed intel specs, but they have higher base clocks and likely lower temps with higher overclocking potential than Ryzen 7 at a much cheaper price than intel competitors. Price/Performance might be better at that end.

Wasn't Ryzen 5 1600X announced to have the same clocks as 1800X (3.6GHz base, 4.0GHz turbo)?
If so, it's not gonna be any better.

Rather disappointed in the gaming results, of course wasn't expecting it to match the 7700K, but, was expecting a bit more from the 1800X.
The 1800X results is what I expected from the 1700.

 

[SRG01]

I'm most curious about the $200 range too. I ran a 1055t 6 core Phenom II up until a couple months ago, though my performance would not have satisfied most PC gamers, it matched console performance on most games. I was able to thoroughly enjoy the first half of this console generations games with it.

I really tried to wait for the Zen. Lack of SSEE support was killing me with games and I found a 6600K for $199 with a mobo discount. No regrets so far with the benches we've seen so far. I'm curious to see how their $200 chip competes.

The R5 chip will be the most competitive as it'll find a home with laptops or possibly home workstations. Intel will most likely drop their i5/i3 prices in response, but that's a good thing.

 

[zeomax]

Looking at this result leads me to think on how much performance Ryzen may gain yet with compilers being properly optimized for the architecture. Right now some programs just don't like the new architecture it seems.

I want to buy a good CPU and not a bunch of ifs, maybes and somedays.

 

[shandy706]

Look at the stock price and that will tell if people are happy, disappointing or just meh.

Dropped a tiny bit early, heading back up/evening off right now.

 

[kamspy]

The R5 chip will be the most competitive as it'll find a home with laptops or possibly home workstations. Intel will most likely drop their i5/i3 prices in response, but that's a good thing.

Will the R5 have integrated graphics for laptops? Right now the video ports on AM4 boards are just dead ports.

 

[Dinky Dino]

I'm most curious about the $200 range too. I bought into the whole "buy more cores now for future performance" and I ran a 1055t 6 core Phenom II up until a couple months ago, though my performance would not have satisfied most PC gamers, it matched console performance on most games. I was able to thoroughly enjoy the first half of this console generation's games with it. Overall I got a lot of life from the chip but wouldn't say that my experiment deserves repeating. I'm neutral looking back on it.

I really tried to wait for the Zen. Lack of SSEE support was killing me with games and I found a 6600K for $199 with an additional mobo discount. No regrets with the benches we've seen so far. I'm curious to see how their $200 chip competes.

Well yea most people don't get i7s for solely gaming as an i5 can do well if you're aiming for 60 fps. But when some people ask me for builds and a budget, the cpu is the area I have trouble with the most because I really don't wanna stick i3s in their builds and a i5 6600k is the bare minimum for me. Doesn't help that ram price skyrocketed these days complicating things further. A 4c/8t at say $175 is the best case scenario for those guys even if the ipc is inferior by say 10%. A 4 core at 130 might be even better depending on performance.

 

[Jaagen]

As an industrial design student who's probably going to be relying on SolidWorks in the coming future, Ryzen is welcome news. I can see why pure gamers are dissapointed, but to echo the sentiments of others, wait for the Ryzen 5 series. And if they fail to impress, than yes, dissapointent would be in place.

 

[NeOak]

are there any reviews of the 1700 yet or is everything mostly focused on the 1800x?

Yes: http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_ryzen_7_1800x_1700x_1700/5.htm
Also in German: https://www.computerbase.de/2017-03/amd-ryzen-1800x-1700x-1700-test/

.

 

[SRG01]

Will the R5 have integrated graphics for laptops? Right now the video ports on AM4 boards are just dead ports.

Integrated graphics aren't going to appear until 2H 2017 IIRC, when AMD releases their APUs.

edit: If some of the rumors regarding Intel/AMD's collaboration as well as the Vega/Navi rumors are true, they can just put a small discrete graphics chip next to the CPU on an interposer of some sort...

 

[kamspy]

Integrated graphics aren't going to appear until 2H 2017 IIRC, when AMD releases their APUs.

edit: If some of the rumors regarding Intel/AMD's collaboration as well as the Vega/Navi rumors are true, they can just put a small discrete graphics chip next to the CPU on an interposer of some sort...

I wonder if we'll see Ryzen in laptops before that.

 

[Nachtmaer]

Will the R5 have integrated graphics for laptops? Right now the video ports on AM4 boards are just dead ports.

So far the only R5 we know of is the 1600X which is 6C/12T. They are launching Raven Ridge later this year which is a Zen-based APU with 4C/8T and is rumored to have 11CUs. They haven't mentioned anything about how they're going to brand it, but it's pretty obvious this one will end up being used for their mobile line-up.

 

[Fracas]

Well that's a disappointment. 7700k it is then.

 

[Deleted member 59090]

So far the only R5 we know of is the 1600X which is 6C/12T. They are launching Raven Ridge later this year which is a Zen-based APU with 4C/8T and is rumored to have 11CUs. They haven't mentioned anything about how they're going to brand it, but it's pretty obvious this one will end up being used for their mobile line-up.

 

[tuxfool]

So far the only R5 we know of is the 1600X which is 6C/12T. They are launching Raven Ridge later this year which is a Zen-based APU with 4C/8T and is rumored to have 11CUs. They haven't mentioned anything about how they're going to brand it, but it's pretty obvious this one will end up being used for their mobile line-up.

The appearance of "Ryzen Mobile" in their presentations suggests that they will use their Ryzen branding everywhere.

 

[kamspy]

Is there any basis for excitement regarding potentially higher clocks on the R5 series? That seems to be the big killer right now. The R7 seems to be maxed out thermally at 4Ghz (with conventional methods) and they went as far as to solder on the heat spreader.

 

[opticalmace]

Is there a list somewhere of what coolers support Ryzen? Just looking for an inexpensive air cooler, might not overclock at all.

 

[NeOak]

Is there any basis for excitement regarding potentially higher clocks on the R5 series? That seems to be the big killer right now. The R7 seems to be maxed out thermally at 4Ghz (with conventional methods) and they went as far as to solder on the heat spreader.

Less cores = less heat. Could be a new revision too.

Is there a list somewhere of what coolers support Ryzen? Just looking for an inexpensive air cooler, might not overclock at all.

Just look for AM4 support.

If you go for the 1700, it already has a cooler.

 

[Nachtmaer]

Right, forgot about that one. My point mostly was that R5 will be their 6 cores, but they haven't been officially revealed yet.

The appearance of "Ryzen Mobile" in their presentations suggests that they will use their Ryzen branding everywhere.

Yeah, I should've been more clear about that. I meant that we don't know whether their APUs are going to fall under the Ryzen 7/5/3 naming scheme or if they're going to do something different. Y'know like their current ones that use A6/8/12 whatever.

 

[Kayant]

PcPer - AMD responds to 1080p gaming tests on Ryzen

AMD responded to the issues late last night with the following statement from John Taylor, CVP of Marketing:

“As we presented at Ryzen Tech Day, we are supporting 300+ developer kits with game development studios to optimize current and future game releases for the all-new Ryzen CPU. We are on track for 1000+ developer systems in 2017. For example, Bethesda at GDC yesterday announced its strategic relationship with AMD to optimize for Ryzen CPUs, primarily through Vulkan low-level API optimizations, for a new generation of games, DLC and VR experiences.

Oxide Games also provided a public statement today on the significant performance uplift observed when optimizing for the 8-core, 16-thread Ryzen 7 CPU design – optimizations not yet reflected in Ashes of the Singularity benchmarking. Creative Assembly, developers of the Total War series, made a similar statement today related to upcoming Ryzen optimizations.

CPU benchmarking deficits to the competition in certain games at 1080p resolution can be attributed to the development and optimization of the game uniquely to Intel platforms – until now. Even without optimizations in place, Ryzen delivers high, smooth frame rates on all “CPU-bound” games, as well as overall smooth frame rates and great experiences in GPU-bound gaming and VR. With developers taking advantage of Ryzen architecture and the extra cores and threads, we expect benchmarks to only get better, and enable Ryzen excel at next generation gaming experiences as well.

Game performance will be optimized for Ryzen and continue to improve from at-launch frame rate scores.” John Taylor, AMD

 

[Nostremitus]

Right, forgot about that one. My point mostly was that R5 will be their 6 cores, but they haven't been officially revealed yet.



Yeah, I should've been more clear about that. I meant that we don't know whether their APUs are going to fall under the Ryzen 7/5/3 naming scheme or if they're going to do something different. Y'know like their current ones that use A6/8/12 whatever.

R5 1500X 4C8T

 

[CryptiK]

I wouldn't be solid on that until Ryzen 5 relases. It probably won't exceed intel specs, but they have higher base clocks and likely lower temps with higher overclocking potential than Ryzen 7 at a much cheaper price than intel competitors. Price/Performance might be better at that end.

They dont have higher base clocks. Their clock speeds are within the exact same range.


Your closest is the 4 at 65W. Which wont OC well at all.

 

[opticalmace]

Less cores = less heat. Could be a new revision too.



Just look for AM4 support.

If you go for the 1700, it already has a cooler.

Thanks!

 

[SRG01]

AMD stock price recovering a bit, now down by 3% and change.

Or to put it into perspective, it's been a flat week overall.

 

[mephixto]

AMD stock price recovering a bit, now down by 3% and change.

Or to put it into perspective, it's been a flat week overall.

Stocks tend to fall heavely during announcements or lauch of key products, I won't look much into it.

 

[Irobot82]

Any good frametime benches at 1440p? Because that's what I game at.

 

[SRG01]

Stocks tend to fall heavely during announcements or lauch of key products, I won't look much into it.

I agree. I'd say wait until Monday to pick up AMD at a slight discount

 

[TC McQueen]

BTW, there's an AMA with Lisa Su and some tech guy going on Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5x4hxu/we_are_amd_creators_of_athlon_radeon_and_other/

 

[Steel]

They dont have higher base clocks. Their clock speeds are within the exact same range.


Your closest is the 4 at 65W. Which wont OC well at all.

That chart is probably old. It's flat out wrong, in fact.

From AMD's presentation. 1600x does not have a 3.3 ghz base clock, the 1500 is not a 6 core cpu. The 1600x has higher base clocks than the 1700x. The main blocker for overclocking right now is temps, which will be lower with a lower core count. Now, how much better is up for debate, but even if performance in games is on par with Ryzen 7 for these cpus they'd still be good price for performance.

Edit: Oh, you edited.

 

[Nostremitus]

Just checked Newegg... Seems to be selling OK compared to the 7700K there...

 

[DouglasteR]

Well, i really hope that something is broken/wrong with the 1800x.

Hoping for a bios upgrade that will make it shine.

 

[Lactose_Intolerant]

BTW, there's an AMA with Lisa Su and some tech guy going on Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5x4hxu/we_are_amd_creators_of_athlon_radeon_and_other/

Ryzen is doing really well in 1440p and 4K gaming when the applications are more graphics bound.

Besides that, her answers have been pretty good.

 

[TheGreyHulk]

Well. Im off the R7 hype train. For gaming, the price isn't justified for me. It's a nice 1st gen offering by AMD but the 7700k is the go to for gaming right now. It has higher clocks but even at the same clock the 7700k perorms better in gaming.

Im hoping with bios updates and patches for games and drivers for gpus that performance can improve. Still interested in R5 but i have my doubts. Going to wait on pulling the upgrade trigger for now.


Overall consensus is that ryzen is awesome for workload data processing (rendering, etc) but for pure gaming it's not a good buy vs the competition at these prices.

 

[RenegadeXV8]

Well AMD's stance is that most games are developed with Intel's compilers in mind and will have to be patched for optimal performance on Ryzen.

We'll see if that ends up being true, but you'd think they would get this sorted out before it launched.

 

[Marmelade]

Well AMD's stance is that most games are developed with Intel's compilers in mind and will have to be patched for optimal performance on Ryzen.

We'll see if that ends up being true, but you'd think they would get this sorted out before it launched.

I might be wrong but didn't they already complain about that when Bulldozer released?

 

[tuxfool]

Well AMD's stance is that most games are developed with Intel's compilers in mind and will have to be patched for optimal performance on Ryzen.

We'll see if that ends up being true, but you'd think they would get this sorted out before it launched.

I'd say most games are compiled with the MSVC compiler. Specific optimizations for Ryzen can't really be sorted out in existing games, only future ones, which is why they're talking about targeting Ryzen over at GDC.

 

[General Lee]

PcPer - AMD responds to 1080p gaming tests on Ryzen

Hopefully there's truth to this claim and devs can implement these optimizations for future titles, but it's not going to fix the performance for games already launched and are not updated anymore.

The more I think about it, the best option for right now is to get 7700K, and sell it in a year or two for Zen+ or hypothetical affordable Intel 8 core. By that point these optimizations should be in play.

 

[TheGreyHulk]

Launch was pretty rushed on the software side. Motherboards need updated bios and whatnot. RAM issues with speed/timings. All that stuff. It's a new chip so this isnt new but they need to bust their asses off if the software side is holding them back