# AMD  Ryzen 7 2700 3.2 GHz



## W1zzard (May 3, 2018)

The Ryzen 7 2700 is the cheaper, sub-$300 sibling of the flagship 2700X, and has nothing disabled on-die. It even comes with an unlocked multiplier and nearly half the TDP rating, which makes it the most energy-efficient processor we ever tested in multi-threaded workloads.

*Show full review*


----------



## ps000000 (May 3, 2018)

Price gap in my country is not much between 2700X and 2700. So 2700X look like a better choice.


----------



## Pap1er (May 3, 2018)

Looks like sweet spot for upgrade from FX8370.


----------



## Beertintedgoggles (May 3, 2018)

I really like your "Energy Usage" methodology.  For me it gives a much better picture of actual consumption and what to expect on one's electric bill.  A processor may suck up ridiculous amounts of juice at max load but if it finishes its calculations in a fraction of the time (compared to its competition) then it might still be the "greener" choice.  Sure, this could be deduced from the performance and power consumption charts but right now it's still fairly early in the morning and I don't want to put forth the effort.


----------



## Brusfantomet (May 3, 2018)

Beertintedgoggles said:


> I really like your "Energy Usage" methodology.  For me it gives a much better picture of actual consumption and what to expect on one's electric bill.  A processor may suck up ridiculous amounts of juice at max load but if it finishes its calculations in a fraction of the time (compared to its competition) then it might still be the "greener" choice.  Sure, this could be deduced from the performance and power consumption charts but right now it's still fairly early in the morning and I don't want to put forth the effort.


That is the "hurry up and wait" thinking that originated from laptops.

Nice review as always, but based on the frequency and boost clock analysis on page 16 it appears precision boost 2 is inactive on the R7 2700. Compared to the R7 2700x, probably due to a bios bug or something, as the frequency/tread graph is so similar to the R7 1800x, and the whole point of precision boost 2 is to have a more linear frequency /tread graph, as noted on this slide.

Could also be that the frequency/tread graph is like this to save power, then it should be like that on all 65W zen+ products.


----------



## bug (May 3, 2018)

Brusfantomet said:


> That is the "hurry up and wait" thinking that originated from laptops.
> 
> Nice review as always, but based on the frequency and boost clock analysis on page 16 it appears precision boost 2 is inactive on the R7 2700. Compared to the R7 2700x, probably due to a bios bug or something, as the frequency/tread graph is so similar to the R7 1800x, and the whole point of precision boost 2 is to have a more linear frequency /tread graph, as noted on this slide.
> 
> Could also be that the frequency/tread graph is like this to save power, then it should be like that on all 65W zen+ products.


It's XFR2 that's missing there (this not being an X chip). It's mentioned in the article.


----------



## _Flare (May 3, 2018)

Great Review Wiz,

So one gets the 1800X Perf @ 1700 Wattage,
the IPC-Gain is so big that even with few hundred MHz less you get 1800X Perf.  thats stunning.

we´ll see if Zen2 can reach intels single-thread Energy-Efficiency on 7nm


----------



## IceShroom (May 3, 2018)

Typo on the processor table on 1st page. 
It should be 'Zen+' instead 'Zen'.


----------



## Space Lynx (May 3, 2018)

Still would have liked to see min FPS tests for 1440p and 4K resolutions, its very important for smooth gameplay.


----------



## jabbadap (May 3, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> Still would have liked to see min FPS tests for 1440p and 4K resolutions, its very important for smooth gameplay.



And by that I assume you mean 99th percentile, not actual minimum fps, which is quite pointless metric.
Edit. had to say I'm bit disappointed of OC potential. Well maybe there's some golden nugget chip that can go further. So silicon lotto as always. Love the clock/thread charts . Have you tried disabling SMT?


----------



## Space Lynx (May 3, 2018)

jabbadap said:


> And by that I assume you mean 99th percentile, not actual minimum fps, which is quite pointless metric.



Gamers Nexus showed the 8700k have 10 fps better min frames across the board over 1700x. at 4K 60hz, that the difference between a stutter when many enemies come on screen at once, and a smooth flow of action.

so yes it would be nice to see benches on min fps at all resolutions.


----------



## AlB80 (May 3, 2018)

Oh, no. One more site had used super pi as performance meter. 

super pi is a very old application that uses deprecated x87 instructions and it was compiled by ancient borland compiler.

Especially funny that single threaded energy efficiency chart is based on super pi results.


----------



## jabbadap (May 3, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> Gamers Nexus showed the 8700k have 10 fps better min frames across the board over 1700x. at 4K 60hz, that the difference between a stutter when many enemies come on screen at once, and a smooth flow of action.
> 
> so yes it would be nice to see benches on min fps at all resolutions.



So percentiles it is what you want. Gamers Nexus uses 99th and 99.9th percentiles(1% 0.1% lows). Yes it is quite important metric I agree.


----------



## W1zzard (May 3, 2018)

AlB80 said:


> Oh, no. One more site had used super pi as performance meter.
> 
> super pi is a very old application that uses deprecated x87 instructions and it was compiled by ancient borland compiler.
> 
> Especially funny that single threaded energy efficiency chart is based on super pi results.


It's a great single-threaded app that properly reflects such scenarios. Good that we have many more tests for you to look at. More than any other site I think.

What would you prefer for single-threaded energy efficiency, and why?


----------



## Brusfantomet (May 3, 2018)

bug said:


> It's XFR2 that's missing there (this not being an X chip). It's mentioned in the article.


Ok, was not able to read thrugh it all wile at work, guess the X is worth it this time around.


----------



## bug (May 3, 2018)

Brusfantomet said:


> Ok, was not able to read thrugh it all wile at work, guess the X is worth it this time around.


Lame excuse. I was also at work and had no problem picking up on that 



W1zzard said:


> It's a great single-threaded app that properly reflects such scenarios. Good that we have many more tests for you to look at. More than any other site I think.
> 
> What would you prefer for single-threaded energy efficiency, and why?


Something more modern, that uses AVX-7000 and probably doesn't exist yet, I reckon.


----------



## AlB80 (May 3, 2018)

W1zzard said:


> It's a great single-threaded app that properly reflects such scenarios.


This scenario is irrelevant. Is there any software that uses x87 instruction (x32 version heavily uses floating point and works on non-SSE2 hardware)? Is it popular?
All performance critical x32 software had migrated to SSE2 or x64. x64 uses SSE2 by default and moves to AVX.



> What would you prefer for single-threaded energy efficiency, and why?


1. Why not cinebench? It's already used for MT energy efficiency chart.
2. Prime95
3. gmplib (chudnovsky.c) calculates pi many times faster than super pi
4. Something without FP at all. Just for fun
5. SPEC CPU2017
6. Fairest: Composite ST and MT ratings


----------



## GoldenX (May 4, 2018)

"AMD on top of an efficiency chart", say that two years ago.
I would like lower prices, but that would need Intel to start a price war, none of the two seems interested.


----------



## W1zzard (May 4, 2018)

AlB80 said:


> Is there any software that uses x87 instruction


Every application that uses floating point uses those instructions, both 32 and 64 bit, they go to the same processor units


----------



## nemesis.ie (May 4, 2018)

I'd be curious to see gaming with a Vega 56 or 64. I know it's (a lot) more work but a lot of us have those cards.

It would potentially show any difference due to the NV drivers using the CPU differently than the AMD ones as well as give those with Vega cards a better idea of which CPU might be best for them.


----------



## Arjai (May 4, 2018)

GoldenX said:


> "AMD on top of an efficiency chart", say that two years ago.
> I would like lower prices, but that would need Intel to start a price war, none of the two seems interested.



It may be the ONLY time that could be said!! 2 years ago, nobody was talking about AMD.


----------



## Space Lynx (May 4, 2018)

Arjai said:


> It may be the ONLY time that could be said!! 2 years ago, nobody was talking about AMD.



It really is a breath of fresh air we got some competition before silicon dies in 2022. Now we just need them to light a fire under Nvidia, and win win for everyone, 4k 144 fps gaming will be possible maybe in 2020 around winter time... all depends if AMD can come out swinging with Vega 2 haha


----------



## ZeroFM (May 6, 2018)

Lacks integrated graphics
Serious ?  Gaming cpu don't need fc integrated graphic ... That sh*t increase temp and wasting cpu die space


----------



## GoldenX (May 6, 2018)

ZeroFM said:


> Lacks integrated graphics
> Serious ?  Gaming cpu don't need fc integrated graphic ... That sh*t increase temp and wasting cpu die space



It's a negative point, the IGP is always useful, and someone working with only the CPU could save money with it.
I hope Zen2 can bring APUs with 6-8 cores.


----------



## bug (May 6, 2018)

GoldenX said:


> It's a negative point, the IGP is always useful, and someone working with only the CPU could save money with it.
> I hope Zen2 can bring APUs with 6-8 cores.


It's only useful if you need it. If you're using a dGPU exclusively, almost half of your CPU price goes to an unused part. It's handy as a backup-up, if the dGPU goes belly up, but if takes way too much die area for that purpose.
Of course, for millions of office PCs that don't need a dGPU, the IGP is a great solution. I just wished IGP-less SKUs would be offered alongside.


----------

