Support NeoGAF

[kotodama]

Hmm looking at that ROG Zenith, RAM speed according to the box tops out at 2800 mhz. I wonder if that'll go up with a BIOS update. Meaning should I go for the 3600 mhz now or just get the recommended 2800 mhz kit?

A quick newegg search seems to suggest that there is a price difference in the 64GB kits, but not so much at the 128GB level.

 

[KimonoNoNo]

Whenever I see a Threadripper in somebody's hand, I have involuntary intake of breath.

It's not a knock against AMD, but jeez that's one huge-ass big chip.

 

[Datschge]

Whenever I see a Threadripper in somebody's hand, I have involuntary intake of breath.

It's not a knock against AMD, but jeez that's one huge-ass big chip.

At least that offers an adequate surface for cooling (unlike the smaller Core X chips with TIM).

 

[NeOak]

Whenever I see a Threadripper in somebody's hand, I have involuntary intake of breath.

It's not a knock against AMD, but jeez that's one huge-ass big chip.

with solder instead of dollar store toothpaste for TIM.

 

[Khaz]

Hoosier Hardware [YouTube] —— My Node 202 Build Dropped 35 Degrees on the CPU with this Mod

That's super concerning. I was planning to put a Ryzen in a super small case along with a Cryorig C7, but the difference in temps is staggering. Any idea why it might be? Is the default Ryzen cooler that good?

 

[Sir Abacus]

That's super concerning. I was planning to put a Ryzen in a super small case along with a Cryorig C7, but the difference in temps is staggering. Any idea why it might be? Is the default Ryzen cooler that good?

The Wraith Spire is a vapor chamber heatsink, so yes, it would be better than a C7.

 

[DemonCleaner]

gathered the overclocking results from the Hardware Unboxed video and filtered the results for new games only:

in this year's games the R5 1600 is now just 5% slower than the 7700K. only 4 months after the whole tech press disdained over ryzens gaming performance, their arguments allready disolved into nothing.

 

[Toe-Knee]

That's super concerning. I was planning to put a Ryzen in a super small case along with a Cryorig C7, but the difference in temps is staggering. Any idea why it might be? Is the default Ryzen cooler that good?

Yup it performs almost as well as my nepton 240m aio and it's quieter to boot.

 

[Khaz]

The Wraith Spire is a vapor chamber heatsink, so yes, it would be better than a C7.

Yup it performs almost as well as my nepton 240m aio and it's quieter to boot.

Damn. I tried googling for low profile vapor chamber heatsink for Ryzen, but couldn't get meaningful results.

I need a cooler of a total height less than 48mm to fit in a Dan A4. The Wraith Stealth seems to have been measured at 5cm in height. So either they rounded up and it fits, or I'll have to shave some of it somehow, or mount a thinner fan.

These were measured and fit, and I thought the C7 was amongst the better ones?

Cooltek LP53 (with thinner fan)
Cooltek IX30
Cryorig C7
Dynatron T318/R31 (for Asrock X99E-ITX)
EKL Alpenfoehn Silvretta
Intel Boxed Cooler
Noctua L9i
Phanteks PH-TC90LS
Raijintek Zelos
Silverstone AR05
Xigmatek Janus (only bottom fan)
Xigmatek Praeton LD963

I won't need it before January and will be using the stock one before, so future coolers may apply lol

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

gathered the overclocking results from the Hardware Unboxed video and filtered the results for new games only:

in this year's games the R5 1600 is now just 5% slower than the 7700K. only 4 months after the whole tech press disdained over ryzens gaming performance, their arguments allready disolved into nothing.

I was looking at the individual title benchmarks and there were some big anomalies in there for Ryzen where it clearly weren't being fully utilised.

But it's nice to see the performance getting better and better. We're at a point now where the difference in FPS on average in new games is unnoticeable even with a Titan X-class card when using a 7700k or cheap 1600.

 

[thelastword]

gathered the overclocking results from the Hardware Unboxed video and filtered the results for new games only:

in this year's games the R5 1600 is now just 5% slower than the 7700K. only 4 months after the whole tech press disdained over ryzens gaming performance, their arguments allready disolved into nothing.

Is there a roundup of the games it actually outperforms the 7700k in? For e.g. I know Ryzen did better in Crysis, Doom, Ashes etc.., what other games have made that list and which games are performing better now?

I know ROTTR and Hitman were recently patched and there are more on the way.....


The other question is this? why compare the R5 1600 to the 7700k, it's a (5) class processor vs a (7) class processor for intel. If with all the updates to ryzen and better memory compatibility, it is so close to the more expensive 7700k, I guess that's saying a lot.....

As I've said before, if AMD can get those chips to 4.5 or 5.0 speeds, intel would be in a world of hurt.....

 

[Shin]

I was looking at the individual title benchmarks and there were some big anomalies in there for Ryzen where it clearly weren't being fully utilised.

But it's nice to see the performance getting better and better. We're at a point now where the difference in FPS on average in new games is unnoticeable even with a Titan X-class card when using a 7700k or cheap 1600.

That's a testament to Zen architecture itself, speaks volumes really and the industry needed this.
Those sites should re-review Ryzen IMO because as it stands it's spreading wrong information.

in this year's games the R5 1600 is now just 5% slower than the 7700K. only 4 months after the whole tech press disdained over ryzens gaming performance, their arguments allready disolved into nothing.

At the time of writing it held true, that's not to say that a lot hasn't changed and/or improved by AMD, they've done amazing work since it's release.
It bodes really well for Zen 2 and Zen 3, here's hoping Navi does something similar in their GPU department.

 

[tbm24]

Hey all, I'm planning out my Ryzen build and i'm somewhat torn on which cpu to actually get. My primary purpose is gaming however my PC is used for many things beyond that(not content creation). Would 1800x be worth it or am I better off with a 1700x for the money? I've been on a i5-2500 for years and I've really appreciated how much mileage I've gotten out of it. From what little I've gathered I understand an OC for either Ryzen chip isn't realistic past 4.0ghz and I'm fine with that overall. I have an Predator X34 in my future and would be currently paired with a 1070 while I wait out to see what nvidia brings next before jumping straight to a 1080ti to put in context what gaming would mean to me with this cpu.

 

[Renekton]

Hey all, I'm planning out my Ryzen build and i'm somewhat torn on which cpu to actually get. My primary purpose is gaming however my PC is used for many things beyond that(not content creation). Would 1800x be worth it or am I better off with a 1700x for the money? I've been on a i5-2500 for years and I've really appreciated how much mileage I've gotten out of it. From what little I've gathered I understand an OC for either Ryzen chip isn't realistic past 4.0ghz and I'm fine with that overall. I have an Predator X34 in my future and would be currently paired with a 1070 while I wait out to see what nvidia brings next before jumping straight to a 1080ti to put in context what gaming would mean to me with this cpu.

Best choice is to go for R7 1700. You can OC it to near 1800X levels if needed.

 

[thelastword]

Ahh, just watched the hardware unboxed video....Great perf per dollar for the ryzen, it beats a $400.00 intel processor (7800x) in many games, but the games where intel beats ryzen at least badly are highly unoptimized for Ryzen. It also appears that some games were recently patched to perform better on intel and worse on Ryzen...Take Mafia 3 for e.g... That game used to perform better on Ryzen, now it performs worse.

Gears, GTA5, Watchdogs2 and Quantum Break were defintiely not prioritized for Ryzen. Look at Mirrors Edge for example, that should be a game that should love Ryzen, also, look at how weirdly some games behave under different api's.....Ryzen loves Vulkan it seems, though in Battlefield 1 it loves DX12, but in DeusEX Mankind Divided, it has some major issues under that api, yet it matches intel under dx11 in that game..So many weird and odd things to notice here...

Very good results overall for Ryzen though, especially a chip priced way below the chips it was compared too. I believe these tests should be revisited when gaming vega launches...The XFX version of gaming Vega that is...

 

[Irobot82]

Anyone know is Ryzen 3 is still launching on the 27th?

 

[·feist·]

Guru3D —— AMD CTO Talks About The Transition towards 7nm

EE Times —— AMD's CTO on 7nm, Chip Stacks

To gear up for 7nm, "we had to literally double our efforts across foundry and design teams...It's the toughest lift I've seen in a number of generations," perhaps back to the introduction of copper interconnects, said Mark Papermaster, in a wide-ranging interview with EE Times.

Both AMD's Zen 2 and Zen 3 x86 processors will be made in 7nm. "It's a long node, like 28nm...and when you have a long node it lets the design team focus on micro-architecture and systems solutions" rather than redesign standard blocks for the next process, Papermaster said.

source

Anyone know is Ryzen 3 is still launching on the 27th?

Yes. There have been unboxings, previews and simulated benchmarks but reviewers will release actual performance and efficiency numbers on the 27th.

Claimed R3 owner videos:

Zhelezka TV [YouTube] —— Exclusive TEST RYZEN 3 1200 in PUBG

Zhelezka TV [YouTube] —— Exclusive TEST RYZEN 3 1200 in 3 popular games

Hardware:
AMD RYZEN 3 1200 3.2GHz
MSI GTX 1060 3GB
8Gb RAM DDR4 3200
WD Blue 1TB
ASrock-ab350m-hdv

 

[DemonCleaner]

Is there a roundup of the games it actually outperforms the 7700k in? For e.g. I know Ryzen did better in Crysis, Doom, Ashes etc.., what other games have made that list and which games are performing better now?

I know ROTTR and Hitman were recently patched and there are more on the way.....

in steve's testing for the OCed results the 1600 didn't beat the 7700k in any game (he's not testing crysis3 anymore sadly). both are the same in the following: World of Tanks, Doom [Vulkan], For Honor, Prey. in some of this cases this might be because of frame rate limits or GPU bound scenarios.

The other question is this? why compare the R5 1600 to the 7700k, it's a (5) class processor vs a (7) class processor for intel. If with all the updates to ryzen and better memory compatibility, it is so close to the more expensive 7700k, I guess that's saying a lot.....

why not? the 7700K is still the best gaming CPU around and the cheap r5 is just 5% behind in new games when both are overclocked. i bet the R7 1700 would have faired virtually the same in this comparison. so at this point there's basically no point in not going with ryzen anymore.

 

[Renekton]

Whenever I see a Threadripper in somebody's hand, I have involuntary intake of breath.

It's not a knock against AMD, but jeez that's one huge-ass big chip.

Check out Intel's Skylake-XE

 

[LelouchZero]

Hardware Unboxed - Can Ryzen Play eSports Games at 240 Hz? CS:GO, Overwatch, Rocket League & More! (Video)

Unfortunately they didn't compare it against the 7700K so you don't really know what kind of performance difference there is between the CPUs.

 

[thelastword]

in steve's testing for the OCed results the 1600 didn't beat the 7700k in any game (he's not testing crysis3 anymore sadly). both are the same in the following: World of Tanks, Doom [Vulkan], For Honor, Prey. in some of this cases this might be because of frame rate limits or GPU bound scenarios.

We really need to see more games taking advantage of ryzen, so hopefully we see more games utilizing vulkan and maximizing those ryzen cores.... Funny enough, I saw a video recently where the ryzen CPU was always much lower in utilization than the Intel counterpart and another where the GPU utilization was always lower on the ryzen system. There's still work to be done obviously, (mainly game devs), but 3200 MHZ across the board and other improvements have really put Ryzen as the frontrunner for many reasons, that much is true....


Funny enough, I've heard so much talk in the past about how energy efficient intel chips are, but overclocked they consume alot of power in comparison. At stock speeds Ryzen is the better deal as far as wattage goes too, this makes it's performance near the 400.00 intel chips even more impresive, because we know it's still being held back in some way and has not shown it's full potential.

why not? the 7700K is still the best gaming CPU around and the cheap r5 is just 5% behind in new games when both are overclocked. i bet the R7 1700 would have faired virtually the same in this comparison. so at this point there's basically no point in not going with ryzen anymore.

Fair enough, although I do think the 1600x 1700x and 1800x do pull some better results from title to title on the uptick.... I also do realize that the extra 16GB on the intel platform didn't affect the tests, but I still wish there was parity there tbh....but good results all around...... Next step is Vega I suppose and we will see how favorably it pairs up with Ryzen...

 

[Datschge]

STH is finally starting to publish some Epyc numbers:
ServeTheHome —— AMD EPYC Infinity Fabric Latency DDR4 2400 v 2666: A Snapshot

Summary (since the article does a pretty bad job of that):
Every die has direct access to 2 channels of RAM and constitutes a separate NUMA node. Accessing RAM that's handled by another die either on the same or the other processor imposes additional latency. As between processors there are only four links there is an additional latency if the RAM is not behind the linked die.

Latencies for DDR4 2666:
81-85ns - Die to RAM (like Ryzen)
132-138ns (+47-57ns) - Die to die to RAM (within one Epyc chip, will likely be the case in Threadripper as well)
198-200ns - Chip to chip
234-246ns (+34-48ns) - Chip to chip to die

Going from DDR4 2400 to 2666 improved latencies 7-9% and bandwidth 7-12%.

 

[Kayant]

Whew!

Now that's some something to upgrade to and call it quits for a good couple of years.

https://videocardz.com/71110/asrock-details-x399-fatal1ty-professional-gaming

 

[danyboypremier]

Whew!

Now that's some something to upgrade to and call it quits for a good couple of years.

https://videocardz.com/71110/asrock-details-x399-fatal1ty-professional-gaming

ooooooh! I'll probably not have de money, but still.

 

[kotodama]

Whew!

Now that's some something to upgrade to and call it quits for a good couple of years.

https://videocardz.com/71110/asrock-details-x399-fatal1ty-professional-gaming

Interesting seems to support faster ram speeds than the ASUS X399 board. I guess that answers my question. Though now, which of 'em all to get? The X399 Taichi looks nice from the link. Lets see what Gigabyte has to offer.

 

[Kayant]

ooooooh! I'll probably not have de money, but still.

I know that feel 😪 maybe next year I might be able to although with the way I travel about(At Uni atm) probably not the best of ideas 😁. R5 1600 will hold me for now I think.

 

[ChoklitReign]

I'm trying to upgrade my BIOS with Gigabyte's Q-Flash and it's not working. I don't know if you boot using the ZIP file or the F5 file, but I tried both and failed. When it tried to boot with the 3 files unzipped, the BAT file disappeared. I tried Q-Flashing using the End key and rearranging my boot order, didn't work either. I'm positive this is the latest BIOS for my motherboard.

 

[PFD]

Whew!

Now that's some something to upgrade to and call it quits for a good couple of years.

https://videocardz.com/71110/asrock-details-x399-fatal1ty-professional-gaming

Got damn

 

[Booker.DeWitt]

Quick question guys. I bought the ryzen 5 1600 for my first PC build. I am deciding on which Mobo to get, but I will probably get the Asus strix b350.

Has anybody here tested this Mobo with any ddr4 ram and was able to obtain de speed of 2933 or 3200? It is very confusing and I get different answers . Some Corsair vengeance lpx work, others not. Thanks

 

[Oreoleo]

I'm trying to upgrade my BIOS with Gigabyte's Q-Flash and it's not working. I don't know if you boot using the ZIP file or the F5 file, but I tried both and failed. When it tried to boot with the 3 files unzipped, the BAT file disappeared. I tried Q-Flashing using the End key and rearranging my boot order, didn't work either. I'm positive this is the latest BIOS for my motherboard.

You only need the F5 file, not the whole zip. Changing boot order shouldn't be necessary either. You might need to go into BIOS first and press END from there rather than during boot like the online guides say? Not sure. I remember getting momentarily stumped when trying to update my BIOS a few weeks ago. Hopefully you can figure it out.

 

[Paragon]

I'm trying to upgrade my BIOS with Gigabyte's Q-Flash and it's not working. I don't know if you boot using the ZIP file or the F5 file, but I tried both and failed. When it tried to boot with the 3 files unzipped, the BAT file disappeared. I tried Q-Flashing using the End key and rearranging my boot order, didn't work either. I'm positive this is the latest BIOS for my motherboard.
http://i.imgur.com/uGqsftH.png

Is your USB drive formatted as FAT32? If it's using another format, the UEFI may not be able to read it.
Whatever you do, don't try to use a Windows program to update it.

 

[ChoklitReign]

Figured it out! It was formatted in NTSF. Why do we have all these storage formats when they cause so much trouble?

 

[Khaz]

Figured it out! It was formatted in NTSF. Why do we have all these storage formats when they cause so much trouble?

I hear you, everything should use btrfs

 

[SmokedMeat]

I'm hoping someone can give me their thoughts on upgrading from an i5-4690k to Ryzen, and whether it's worth it?

For what I'd be selling my i5-4690k and motherboard for, I could literally buy the Ryzen 1600 and a motherboard. Is it going to provide me with a large enough leap, or should I spring for the 1700 model?

 

[c0de]

I hear you, everything should use btrfs

Nnnnahhh...

 

[Toe-Knee]

I'm hoping someone can give me their thoughts on upgrading from an i5-4690k to Ryzen, and whether it's worth it?

For what I'd be selling my i5-4690k and motherboard for, I could literally buy the Ryzen 1600 and a motherboard. Is it going to provide me with a large enough leap, or should I spring for the 1700 model?

I made the exact upgrade. 4690k to ryzen 1600 and everything has run a lot better for me.

My system is mostly used for music production but it's made a massive difference in rendering times and vst heavy workflows

Games have shown a good improvement too.

 

[Lonely1]

I'm hoping someone can give me their thoughts on upgrading from an i5-4690k to Ryzen, and whether it's worth it?

For what I'd be selling my i5-4690k and motherboard for, I could literally buy the Ryzen 1600 and a motherboard. Is it going to provide me with a large enough leap, or should I spring for the 1700 model?

4 to 12 threads with better IPC. It will be worth it if you feel that your CPU is holding your PC back.

 

[bobnowhere]

Ordered my new PC this morning based on a 1700.

 

[SmokedMeat]

I made the exact upgrade. 4690k to ryzen 1600 and everything has run a lot better for me.

My system is mostly used for music production but it's made a massive difference in rendering times and vst heavy workflows

Games have shown a good improvement too.

That's good to hear.

Especially given the recent comparison to the i7 models, the 1600 looks like a fantastic deal.

4 to 12 threads with better IPC. It will be worth it if you feel that your CPU is holding your PC back.

I don't feel it's holding me back at all. But if I can upgrade to a more current setup at little cost I feel like I might as well go for it.

 

[RumblingRosco]

So I watched this video about Ryzen RAM overclocking.

The video description links a spreadsheet which can be used to determine roughly how much to loosen RAM timings in exchange for a higher clock speed; here's a screenshot:

Does this spreadsheet seem reliable as a starting point? I'm wondering if I can get my Corsair Vengeance LPX 3000 MHz from my current 2933/1.35V to 3066 or even 3200 at no more than 1.37V. Just wondering if loosening the timings (based on inputting my RAM's timings/clock into the spreadsheet) seems like a reasonable idea? Obviously there are no guarantees, but just looking where to start on going higher.

 

[DemonCleaner]

some more derivation from the Hardware Unboxed bench results to think about:

as you normalize to same clockspeeds ryzen seems to have significantly better "IPC" (over 15%) in gaming loads compared to the new intel sixcore.

So I watched this video about Ryzen RAM overclocking.

The video description links a spreadsheet which can be used to determine roughly how much to loosen RAM timings in exchange for a higher clock speed; here's a screenshot:



Does this spreadsheet seem reliable as a starting point? I'm wondering if I can get my Corsair Vengeance LPX 3000 MHz from my current 2933/1.35V to 3066 or even 3200 at no more than 1.37V. Just wondering if loosening the timings (based on inputting my RAM's timings/clock into the spreadsheet) seems like a reasonable idea? Obviously there are no guarantees, but just looking where to start on going higher.

no clue if that works. but if you try that out, could you give some feedback?

 

[RumblingRosco]

no clue if that works. but if you try that out, could you give some feedback?

Absolutely. I just finished ripping apart my 1080 Ti down to the bare PCB and installing an AIO liquid cooler on it, but I'm waiting for a laser thermometer to arrive so I can check the VRM and VRAM temperatures. Once I verify that those are at a reasonable temperature, I'll get to tinkering with the RAM overclock. That should be this weekend as the thermometer will arrive tomorrow, so I'll get a write-up here hopefully early next week.

 

[·feist·]

LamboTechnology [YouTube] —— AMD Zen Cpu Architecture Core Scaling - 1700X 1950X 76001 in Cinebench R15

NOTE: On graph 2 in threads section, total score is divided by 2 as Epyc is a dual socket machine.

AMD Zen Cpu Architecture Core Scaling of Ryzen 1700X, Threadripper 1950X and Epyc 7601 in Cinebench R15.

Please share & subscribe if you like the video, Thank You.

AMD Ryzen 1700X (4 MB L2 + 16MB L3) Stock
x370 motherboard
64GB 3200mhz RAM c15 TridentZ
850W Platinum PSU

AMD Threadripper 1950X 16c/32t (8 MB L2 + 32MB L3) Stock
x399 motherboard
64GB 3200mhz RAM c15
850W Platinum PSU

2X Epyc 7601 or 64c-128t/2 (16mb L2 + 64MG L3) Stock
SuperMicro dual socket.
128 PCIe lanes, 512GB ECC (Max 4TB)
Dual 850W platinum PSUs.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=244153698&postcount=3598

LamboTechnology [YouTube] —— AMD Threadripper 1920x vs i9-7900x OC cinebench R15 benchmark


LamboTechnology [YouTube] —— AMD Threadripper 1950x 16core vs E5-2679v4 20core Cinebench R15 benchmark


LamboTechnology [YouTube] —— AMD EPYC 7601 vs Intel Xeons in Cinebench R15

 

[Durante]

as you normalize to same clockspeeds ryzen seems to have significantly better "IPC" (over 15%) in gaming loads compared to the new intel sixcore.

That's an incredibly flawed methodology.
The CPUs benchmarked at higher speeds will inevitably hit more bottlenecks throughout the system, which will hurt their "IPC" in that metric, which makes no sense.

If you want to do an IPC comparison, you simply need to run all of them at the same fixed clock speed.

 

[spyshagg]

LamboTechnology [YouTube] —— AMD Zen Cpu Architecture Core Scaling - 1700X 1950X 76001 in Cinebench R15





http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=244153698&postcount=3598

Amazing

 

[Datschge]

If you want to do an IPC comparison, you simply need to run all of them at the same fixed clock speed.

Yeah, hardware.fr did that at 3Ghz: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=242210508&postcount=3357

 

[·feist·]

If you want to do an IPC comparison, you simply need to run all of them at the same fixed clock speed.

Yeah, hardware.fr did that at 3Ghz: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=242210508&postcount=3357

April 2017 -- Agner Fog:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?&p=234396691&postcount=2663

Agner Fog:

The single-thread instructions per clock rate of Ryzen is higher than for any Intel processor, except for 256-bit vector code. I am testing the Ryzen right now and the test results are coming soon. Please be patient.

May 2017 -- Agner Fog's Ryzen testing and optimisation update:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?&p=235557133&postcount=2771

http://www.agner.org/optimize/
http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=838
http://www.agner.org/optimize/microarchitecture.pdf

March 2017 -- before UEFI/BIOS performance updates:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=231739419&postcount=1461

Simulated 4C/8T Zen -vs- Kaby Lake —— AMD Ryzen 7 1800X vs Intel Core i7-7700K version Core: Core and MHz: MHz [Thai original]
http://www.zolkorn.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-intel-core-i7-7700k-mhz-by-mhz-core-by-core/
[English translation by author ZoLKoRn]

Hello all, This is a first article I try to publish in English version. However, one thing you should know before reading this article is I’m not expert on English so about the grammar some may not correct but I hope this will help you to understand more about this article better than using Google translate or other.

Today I will test in the way that I believe many of you would like to see. And it should help to make the result clearer or easier to estimate for the test in MHz to MHz and Core to Core of new CPU from AMD “RYZEN”, Which is going to compare with Core i7-7700K frome Intel. Some of you may not understand what I’m going to do? or what I am try to present? The test will take place in the form of MHz to MHz and Core to Core also included the same speed of the CPU from two models for RYZEN 7 1800X and Core i7-7700K to see or estimate that the power per MHz of each CPU.

The method that I will use for testing is I will disable RYZEN 7 1800X core to 4 cores from it all 8 cores as we already know in this ways we will have RYZEN 7 1800X working on 4 core 8 threads same as Core i7-7700K but we still can’t compare it. Because both CPU still have different on L3 Cache size. RYZEN 7 1800X have 16MB and 7700K have only 8MB. That mean 1800X has advantage on L3 cache. Even it not hundred percents comparison but we can assume or estimate something from this test. Because right now our RYZEN 7 1800X will be simulation of RYZEN R5 series as 1400X model. We already know from leaked news that AMD will have RYZEN 5 1400X with 4 cores and 8 threads.

 

[TC McQueen]

Ryzen 3 reviews are dropping:
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-3-1300X-and-1200-Processor-Review/

For the mainstream consumer and market, we now have a complete picture of the Ryzen CPU family from AMD and I am impressed by the performance, capability, and completeness of the lineup. In a matter of just a few months, AMD has gone from irrelevant to revolutionary, rebooting the company in a way that seemed impossible just a few years ago. The Ryzen 3 1300X and 1200 are not rewriting the segment but they are reorganizing the way the sub-$150 processor market will unfold for 2017 and beyond.

http://techreport.com/review/32301/amd-ryzen-3-1300x-and-ryzen-3-1200-cpus-reviewed

AMD's Ryzen 7 family brought the cost of many-core performance out of the stratosphere, and its Ryzen 5 family delivered new levels of multi-threaded performance to the under-$250 bracket. Ryzen 3 CPUs achieve a more modest goal: competitive performance against Intel's Core i3 family in productivity and gaming. Our tests show that whether one gets four threads from discrete cores or Hyper-Threading, the resulting performance in both work and play is about a wash. That's good news for AMD, but Ryzen 3 parts will still sell for as much as Core i3s—a fact that I find a bit hard to stomach.

As I noted at the beginning of this review, those prices seem ambitious for one major reason: onboard graphics and Ryzen's lack thereof. Intel's similarly-priced Core i3 chips offer a plug-and-play PC build for those who don't game. That missing graphics processor won't matter for gamers shopping Ryzen 3, of course, but it matters for the much larger market of basic PCs and home-theater machines out there. The unavoidable need for and cost of a discrete graphics card limits the appeal and design envelope for Ryzen 3 chips. All this will change with the eventual arrival of Ryzen APUs and their Radeon Vega onboard graphics, but for now, Intel would seem to maintain its lock on the basic DIY PC.

Considering Ryzen's missing integrated graphics, AMD might have considered even more aggressive pricing. A Ryzen 3 1300X for $99 or $109 and a Ryzen 3 1200 for $79 or $89 would have really given us something to talk about for performance-per-dollar, and it would also leave plenty of wiggle room for buyers to squeeze that discrete graphics card into their budgets. Those price points wouldn't be unprecedented, either: the company's unlocked and graphics-free Athlons of years past occupied similar brackets. Ryzen 3 chips seem like a perfect successor to those products.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-3-1300x-cpu,5149.html

However, enthusiasts looking for a speedy chip should strongly consider the Ryzen 3 1300X. It's an excellent value that leaves room in your budget for other high-performance devices. It also gives you spare cores for productivity applications. AMD has solidified its AM4 motherboard ecosystem, so the platforms are stable, and we can confidently recommend them. We’ll follow up with in-depth application testing, but initial signs are positive. After all, it isn’t hard to imagine that quad-core models will best Intel's dual-cores offerings in most productivity applications.

Make no mistake, you’ll see the Ryzen 3 1300X on our Best CPUs list soon. We'll circle back with application testing in the Ryzen 3 1200 review. Meanwhile, the Coffee Lake processors can’t come soon enough for Intel.

...

AMD’s Ryzen 3 1300X sets a new benchmark for the budget market with four physical cores, unlocked multipliers, and excellent bundled coolers. All of this comes at a lower price point than Intel’s competing models. Support for overclocking on inexpensive Socket AM4 motherboards with the B350 chipset just adds to the value.

 

[PFD]

Delidding reaveals Threadripper actually has 4 Ryzen dies just like the 32-core EPYC, with two of them disabled

https://videocardz.com/71252/amd-ryzen-threadripper-delidding-by-der8auer-reveals-four-ryzen-dies

 

[LelouchZero]

Delidding reaveals Threadripper actually has 4 Ryzen dies just like the 32-core EPYC, with two of them disabled

https://videocardz.com/71252/amd-ryzen-threadripper-delidding-by-der8auer-reveals-four-ryzen-dies

Whoa!

Oh man, it would be incredible to see a return of core unlocking!