Thank you for this feedback, I really appreciate it. I don't want to buy something I cannot use so I'm glad I have been warned beforehand. I will upgrade my GPU to a 1070 or 1080 first.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AMD Ryzen Thread: Affordable Core Act
- Thread starter ·feist·
- Start date
Thank you for this feedback, I really appreciate it. I don't want to buy something I cannot use so I'm glad I have been warned beforehand. I will upgrade my GPU to a 1070 or 1080 first.
Neverforget
Member
Any idea when this new stepping is coming? I just finished my R5 1600 build and I can still return and wait a little bit. Unless it's going to takes months.
I really want to go Ryzen but this whole memory debacle is putting me right off. On the other hand, I literally only use my PC for gaming so maybe a 7600K would actually be better?
I would get a 1600X with a Gigabyte GA-AX370-Gaming K3, but I have no clue what RAM would give me best results. Ideally a 16GB (2x8) kit at 3000/3200MHz for that Ryzen sweet spot, but nothing too expensive. The annoying thing is, the QVL for that motherboard doesn't list any 3000 or 3200 kits :|
I would get a 1600X with a Gigabyte GA-AX370-Gaming K3, but I have no clue what RAM would give me best results. Ideally a 16GB (2x8) kit at 3000/3200MHz for that Ryzen sweet spot, but nothing too expensive. The annoying thing is, the QVL for that motherboard doesn't list any 3000 or 3200 kits :|
I suppose the question is how many cores does the turbo clock apply to, and how will they overclock.
Since they are basically four Ryzen dies strapped together by infinity fabric, I would think that they should be capable of hitting ~4GHz if the power delivery and cooling can handle it.
But I might also have expected something like a 4-core turbo to be doing that anyway. (one core on each die)
It's likely that this restriction is because they are aimed at servers/high-end workstations where efficiency is critical - just as Xeons are lower clocked than the equivalent HEDT parts. Threadripper is probably going to have more aggressive clockspeeds.
Have they said that Xeons will use Turbo Boost Max 3.0?
As I've said though: I expect Intel to be the better performer in most cases - but the question is going to be whether you consider their performance advantage to be enough to justify spending 2-3x the price.
An i7-7820X is still $600 compared to an R7-1700 for $300 - and X299 motherboards are likely to be twice the price of a B350/X370 board too.
If your workload scales to use many cores, Threadripper/Epyc may win on performance. Not core-for-core, but by being able to buy 16 Zen cores for the price of 10 Skylake cores for example.
This is more of a concern for consumer workloads where it's a mixture of well and poorly threaded tasks, instead of servers where all cores are fully loaded most if not all the time, or where high core counts often matter more when licensing is per-CPU and not per-core - though that is starting to change.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
I normally only get Intel, and even though I do not plan to overlock my cores, the reports of the i9 almost melting PCs scares me.
llien
Member
I'm pretty sure 1600x is better than 7600k even at gaming.
Even more so, if you stick with AMD GPU.
neurosisxeno
Member
Nope.
dr_rus
Member
That's how you get into the BIOS with fast boot enabled, via Shift-Restart from Windows. It should work, unless the BIOS itself is bugged.
Eh... All I had to do after the bios updates was turn on A-XMP and my ram(g. skill ripjaws 3200 mhz) was set. This is on an MSI B-350 Tomahawk with a 1700, mind.
I would get a 1600 and just overclock to 3.8-4.0, you'll get similiar performance to the 7600k(sometimes better, sometimes worse, mostly better frametimes) for cheaper.
The 1600x is either equal to, slightly worse, or slightly better than a 7600k depending on the game. It also has better frametimes in a lot of cases.
I'd argue that there are sadly still a whole lot of "professional" (as in, certainly not "consumer") workloads which don't scale arbitrarily, and certainly don't do so at all times. And for quite a few of them that's unlikely to change anytime soon.
The one I'm personally most affected by, compiling, is one of them.
llien
Member
neurosisxeno
Member
That's not untrue, it wasn't the major part I took issue with. The 1600X is a great CPU and more than capable of gaming, and as you said is pretty much completely on par with a 7600k.
I should have clarified. I don't think there's any evidence an RX 580 is better with a 1600X than a 7600k. Most of the benchmarks out there slapped a 1080 or 1080 Ti with them during testing, so I couldn't find any definitive proof, but I see no reason why an AMD GPU would function inherently better with an AMD CPU than with an Intel CPU. Also the prices on 480's and 580's is through the roof lately.
Buggy Loop
Member
Oh !!! Sounds like a similar path to me. I'm currently on phenom 1090T with a R9-280.
Just started buying pieces yesterday to switch to HTPC, but plan on keeping R9-280 for a while since new gpu tech is coming and mining craze should drop.
But did you notice a substantial bump in performances just with the cpu?
Nice build man. That psu isnt future proof though. Would of gone with atleast 800w.
That's crazy you only need that much if you plan to do SLI/CF . 500w and below is fine for most systems with OC GPU/CPU.
It kind of overshadowed the leapfrog AMD actually did there. Though it's all well since AMD reacted like one ideally always should, with steady improvements in the criticized areas and beyond. The much better reactions to Ryzen 5 already showed the approach was chosen well, and with Intel visibly reacting the general mood changes further.
Aside that Zen's counterpart to Turbo Boost 3.0 is XFR which isn't mentioned in the table at all, I wouldn't put too much stock into these leaks. Like with previous supposed Threadripper leaks the model numbering is completely messed up and in no way follows the clear scheme that AMD set up for Ryzen on AM4 before. So take only with a big grain of salt.
As I wrote before reports are that the B2 stepping fixes uncore/SoC bugs. My personal guess is that they relate to the 32 PCIe lanes every Ryzen die has. As we know AM4 doesn't make use of all 32 PCIe lanes that should be there, possibly because B1 stepping is bugged in that regard? Both Epyc and Threadripper will need all of them, so I expect all B2 stepping dies to go into those chips before they reach AM4 chips (where they likely don't make much, if any, of a difference).
High end Gpus will always be power hungry. If he plan to buy vega it might cut him close.
Evolution of Metal
Member
Both 1080ti and Fury X are around 300W. Processors are under 100w these days. Other components are going to be far from 100W. Please tell us where to spend another 300W.
In the future, the power consumption of high-end GPUs is only going to go down.
His current computer is around 520w according to https://seasonic.com/psu-calculator/
Which is a far from needing 800w. As Evolution of Metal mentioned things are getting more efficient so that amount of power isn't going to go up and even if it does it's not going to be 500w or higher on the gpu side which is when you would think about 800w.
eso76
Member
this sounds tempting.
let's say
250 $ for the CPU
85 $ for the mobo
115 $ for the ram
250 $ for the GPU
uhm...how does it compare to my old ass i7 920 + 12GB + GTX460 ?
I don't think i would need a bigger PSU (500w or 550w can't remember) since newer CPUs/GPUs are a lot more power efficient, right ?
According to benchmarks it's on par with the i7 5820K i use at work (paired with a GTX970, also slightly slower than a 580)
this sounds tempting.
let's say
250 $ for the CPU
85 $ for the mobo
115 $ for the ram
250 $ for the GPU
uhm...how does it compare to my old ass i7 920 + 12GB + GTX460 ?
I don't think i would need a bigger PSU (500w or 550w can't remember) since newer CPUs/GPUs are a lot more power efficient, right ?
According to benchmarks it's on par with the i7 5820K i use at work (paired with a GTX970, also slightly slower than a 580)
I mean, if we're talking american dollars, the normal 1600 is $210-230 depending on where you look(If you get an aftermarket cooler it's more, but the stock cooler is good enough to get you to 3.8 ghz). That being said, the mobo will probably be more like $90-100 unless you find a deal. You've got the ram right. Could get 16 gb 3200 mhz DDR4 for that much.
The GPU... Well, a 580 is pretty expensive ATM because of the mining rush, but if you manage to get one at the price they're supposed to be then yeah.
For the PSU... You're kinda on the low end, but it should work out.
As for performance compared to your current build? Well, it'd be pretty much night and day considering how long you've gone without updating.
The memory issue is an issue with overclocking your memory with certain brands. That's been getting fixed in recent bios updates and varies from board to board. The bios issues vary from board to board as well, I will say my MSI B350 tomahawk is in a good place now. Originally I had to juggle Ryzen Master and the bios in order to overclock my memory to 3200 MHZ, but now I don't need to bother with Ryzen Master. Just gotta turn on A-XMP.
Better be safe then sorry. Even if things get more efficient, power draw will always be high on high end products.
The cost isnt going to be huge between 650w and 800w.
Lagspike_exe
Member
Which means power draw increased from 980ti to 1080ti despite a node shrink. And nvidia is more efficient than amd.
I used to have this mindset but that delta too big and is largely wasted. Something like 650w would be a good delta to have in this situation.
That depends on the brand but I would estimate it's a few bit that can be better put towards other parts for example my PSU which is Evga G2 750w(Totally overkill for my build which I recently measured about 330w peak from the wall)
Edit -
850w would actually be cheaper than 750w if it was in stock for prime.
650w to 850w would be about £21 using prime pricing.
For what it's worth, I just tested my system which is an R7-1700X at 3.9GHz at 1.35V, and a GTX 1070 Strix OC at its stock speed.
Running FurMark and IntelBurnTest together, my UPS reported a peak load of 495W. Average during demanding games (Dishonored 2) is more like 330W though.
To be fair, I do also have 8 HDDs in there, but that shouldn't be pulling more than 30W or so when idle.
A 1080Ti is going to be drawing at least 100W more than that, probably 150W or more if it's overclocked.
Look at the power efficiency curve for any power supply.
Their peak efficiency is around 50% load, so high wattage power supplies are a good choice for a gaming system.
If an overclocked 1700/X and 1080Ti is going to average around 400-450W when gaming, that means a power supply around 800W or so would be ideal, since efficiency under heavy load is more important than idle.
If your system is pulling 450W with peaks of 600W on a 650W power supply, it should be perfectly stable - but you're losing efficiency and the fan will be running at or near full speed when gaming.
Does Metro: Last Light stress the CPU much? Especially an 8-core CPU.
One thing that is lost in the PSU discussions is that:
1) you'd want at least 20% slack, more ideally.
2) PSU efficiency peaks around 60% load.
3) Sometimes it is nice having a PSU that can provide instantaneous current for transients. Notably things like HDDs have massive power spikes during spinup.
Now, none of these things are requirements, though if you value the life of your PSU you'd at least follow 1.
1) you'd want at least 20% slack, more ideally.
2) PSU efficiency peaks around 60% load.
3) Sometimes it is nice having a PSU that can provide instantaneous current for transients. Notably things like HDDs have massive power spikes during spinup.
Now, none of these things are requirements, though if you value the life of your PSU you'd at least follow 1.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
As someone who's been shopping around and comparing benchmarks the only games where I've seen Ryzen 1600x have the edge over 7600k is with Square Enix titles like Deus EX and Hitman. The 7600k either slightly bests it or outright beats it in every other game. I'm looking for a good reason to make my next upgrade the Ryzen, but I'm not finding it.
For an aggregate:
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/CPU-Hardware-154106/Tests/Rangliste-Bestenliste-1143392/
This is for games only(The games tested are listed at the top, the applications aren't including for that graph) at 720p. The 1600x slightly outperforms the 7600k overall, the stock 1600 slightly underperforms the 7600k overall, neither deus ex nor hitman are listed here.
You can find comparisons for applications at the link.
This one is applications and games combined(courtesy of Feist):
Evolution of Metal
Member
PSU efficiency, at least the curve on my Corsair 650TX and Enermax 500W, is within 3% difference between 40-100%, however, it is almost 10% less efficient at 20-0% loads.
The larger PSU you buy, the less efficient you are. You are not going to save money on electricity or be more secure by having a beefy PSU. Don't trust the PSU wattage calculators, they will add their own precautions just in case on top of the already most extreme parts manufacturer's estimations which are way over real-world scenarios anyway.
I''m not. I'm trusting my own experience with frying PSUs. However, it does depend on the quality of the components used in the PSU and (obviously) your typical workload, but as a blanket recommendation it is what I give.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
The memory issue has more to do with trying to run the memory at it's designated speed.
In probably most instances, you can pop the memory in and the system will run fine at 2133 Mhz, the default speed. If you get memory that is only rated for 2133MHz then you're fine.
However, the performance of Ryzen is really being held back unless you get memory that runs at at least 2667 MHz.
So most people get memory that runs between 3000-3200 MHz, BUT many people have had issues getting it to run at those speeds and in a lot of instances are forced to downclock and/or do a lot of deep tweaking in the BIOS due to RAM issues.
From what I gather it has really been a crapshoot.
For example, right now my 3000 rated memory is running at 2667. Today I plan to finally do some tweaking and seeing if I can get it to at least 2933 MHz
Yeah I had to do some tweaking to get my 3200 mhz memory running at 3200 mhz before the april bios update to my board. Not so bad with my MSI board atm, though. Hopefully future updates prevent the problem for everyone.
NeOak
Member
They should have gone for 200W TDP if it meant 4 Ghz for some of them.
llien
Member
There have been benchmarks comparing 1800x vs 7700k on RX 480 vs 1060.
It was a game or two that I have seen. Techreport found that while effect is there, it changes from a game to a game, it's not consistent, so I stand corrected:
http://www.techspot.com/article/1374-amd-ryzen-with-amd-gpu/page2.html
digitalrelic
Banned
So what's the best Ryzen motherboard to go with today? Best stability/RAM compatibility/etc..?
I've been holding off for Intel's i9/X299 reviews, but I'm a bit disappointed & I'm looking at Ryzen now.
I've been holding off for Intel's i9/X299 reviews, but I'm a bit disappointed & I'm looking at Ryzen now.
Asus ch6. Every month that mobo gets improved.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
If you want cheap and decent the ASRock B350 AM4 Pro isn't bad.
But for 350 chipsets the MSI Tomahawk seems to be considered the best.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Unfortunately it doesn't look like I have the ability to adjust CPU-SOC in my BIOS.·feist·;240664172 said:
What issues did you come across? I have a 960 EVO (250GB) and setup was the exact same as if it were any other SATA drive.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
The main issue the fact that the USB stick couldn't immediately install on to it.
I had to follow this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMo8krAJd5Q&t=16s
I call bs on that calculator also. No way this system is drawing that much power.
I think Crossfire/SLI is dumb so im not going that route anyway. 650w is plenty for any single gpu system as long as the psu is high quality (which according to reviews the FSP Hydro is one of the best)
AsRock Taichi has the best reviews and its what I just bought and its great so far(only had it a week though)
Pair it with some Gskill memory and most likely you're golden. I didnt even have to screw around with timings or anything.
Be sure and update to the latest bios though