AMD Ryzen Discussion Thread.

[Frag_Maniac]

1: I know you were replying to his specific scenario and in that case you are right however when you turn it into a sweeping generalisation then what I said stands correct all the way from Ryzen 1400-1700. Even then it's likely a small % of 1700x1800x owners who have bought 4000+ RAM which also doesnt work out of the box with some intel combos.
2: see reply below, this is true anything from 2800-3200 is seen as the sweet spot and performance gains are negligible beyond that
3: agreed, it was released a month too early and there should have been better collaboration between AMD and motherboard mfrs to iron out those release day issues and update microcode

Look, I don't really care to turn this into an ongoing argument. Just take my point of mentioning it for those interested in higher speed RAM, or not, I don't care, but you ARE being over defensive here. Plus no one's even HAD a chance to bench Ryzen at over 3200 speed yet, so how do you even know what the benefits beyond that are? Clearly you're just trying to defend your purchase of 3200 speed RAM before knowing the results of higher speed after the dividers are released.

This is what I mean by not interested, and not informed. If I say something that doesn't apply to you, just ignore it. Acting all defensive and justified about not being interested in things not even discovered yet is just ludicrous though. And that's without even mentioning that purecain got his 4000 speed at better pricing than the lower speed was in his area.

There's no point to acting like an over defensive fanboy here. His purchase of 4000 was more out of practicality than elitism. Many of us are just eager to see what results are obtained with speeds over 3200 on Ryzen, but I'd rather not speculate like you, and get actual feedback instead. Despite what I say about AMD, I'm only wanting best case scenario so they can actually BE competitive this time around. I mean JEEZ, lay off dude. Time to give it a rest already.

 

[purecain]

I forgot to mention, corsair sent the bracket I paid for today so I have a spare. someone can have it, is there anyone here using am3 with a plastic back plate on the ch6.

because I think you would be better off using am4 with the one provided. this is subject to my own reasoning, which I'm basing on the rog forums reports of bending boards or weird errors.

hopefully I can help someone out with it, comes with fittings and fits any new aio water cooling

 

[infrared]

no one's even HAD a chance to bench Ryzen at over 3200 speed yet

I don't mean to get in the middle of a discussion, but a few of us have been benching at 3600-3800mhz ram. So far the best I've done is 3700mhz. When the newer bioses come out supporting some higher speeds without raising the base clock it should get pretty interesting.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

I don't mean to get in the middle of an arguement, but a few of us have been benching at 3600-3800mhz ram. So far the best I've done is 3700mhz. When the newer bioses come out supporting some higher speeds without raising the base clock it should get pretty interesting.

I was referring to actual game benches, which you're not showing there. Show me ANY credible proof of the differences between 3200 speed and 3700 speed IN GAME PERFORMANCE, and I'll eat my hat on my comment.

Better yet, show me 3700 Ryzen game performance vs 7700k game performance at anything 3200 or higher. Those are the only real benches that matter, because for most gamers, they want to know if Ryzen 8 core is more for tasking than gaming when compared to Intel.

Until then, I stand by what I said. That said, anything you have to pay extra for to bring Ryzen's performance up is also one more check box against Ryzen. Especially now that extensively testing Ryzen 8 core vs a 7700k in GTA V is not showing any proof of why there's ever so slightly more hitching on Intel.

For all we know, the new Coffee Lake 6 cores coming out soon may also play GTA V smoother. There's just too many unknowns yet for many of us to trust Ryzen over Intel.

 

[infrared]

That's fine, unfortunately I don't have a decent gpu for this rig so can't do any testing. I've seen some youtubers (grain of salt req'd!) testing and the benefit varies from game to game and is probably more to do with how the games are coded. There's only added latency if a lot of data is crossing between the two ccx's, so certain games won't be affected depending on how they're feeding instructions to the cpu.

Anyway, was only saying the hardware is capable, nothing more. Everyone's said their bit.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

That's fine, unfortunately I don't have a decent gpu for this rig so can't do any testing. I've seen some youtubers (grain of salt req'd!) testing and the benefit varies from game to game and is probably more to do with how the games are coded. There's only added latency if a lot of data is crossing between the two ccx's, so certain games won't be affected depending on how they're feeding instructions to the cpu.

Anyway, was only saying the hardware is capable, nothing more. Everyone's said their bit.

It's OK, I'm going to wait until Coffee Lake and Vega come out to compare all components possible first anyway, and by then the new dividers for Ryzen will be out, and there will be more credible bench sources. I think that is the main reason the serious benchers haven't even begun testing beyond 3200 on Ryzen yet, not that I've seen anyway, nor would I trust it this soon if they have. It means nothing without the new dividers.

 

[cdawall]

I was referring to actual game benches, which you're not showing there. Show me ANY credible proof of the differences between 3200 speed and 3700 speed IN GAME PERFORMANCE, and I'll eat my hat on my comment.

Better yet, show me 3700 Ryzen game performance vs 7700k game performance at anything 3200 or higher. Those are the only real benches that matter, because for most gamers, they want to know if Ryzen 8 core is more for tasking than gaming when compared to Intel.

Until then, I stand by what I said. That said, anything you have to pay extra for to bring Ryzen's performance up is also one more check box against Ryzen. Especially now that extensively testing Ryzen 8 core vs a 7700k in GTA V is not showing any proof of why there's ever so slightly more hitching on Intel.

For all we know, the new Coffee Lake 6 cores coming out soon may also play GTA V smoother. There's just too many unknowns yet for many of us to trust Ryzen over Intel.

7700K there is none. 3000-3866 is all the same depending on timings. 2133->3000 is 20+ FPS

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/GSkill/F4-3866C18D-8GTZ/7.html

 

[the54thvoid]

I was referring to actual game benches, which you're not showing there. Show me ANY credible proof of the differences between 3200 speed and 3700 speed IN GAME PERFORMANCE, and I'll eat my hat on my comment.

Better yet, show me.....Ryzen game performance vs 7700k game performance........There's just too many unknowns yet for many of us to trust Ryzen over Intel.

Right now, if you want marginally faster but not perciptable higher frame rates - Intel is the obvious choice as the clockspeeds are far superior on a 7700k. Only a cherry picking nut job would deny that. Subjectively, Ryzen 1700X at 3.9Ghz is very smooth - across 3 games (BF1, GRW & Prey) I've seen no stutter that I can equate to frametime issues. But that could also be the 1080ti.

Fact is, Ryzen is good for gaming. Intel may be better but Ryzen is plain good. I feel happy that I have an 8 core chip that gives me smooth gaming and for me the uplift from my previous 6 core Sandy-E chip @ 4.2 and memory at 1600Mhz is pretty obvious.

If people want more options and a more 'reliable' path - go Intel, it really is that simple. But, for <£400 how could I not buy an 8 core powerhouse? Even the most expensive Asus board (CH6) was about what a 'decent' Z270 would have cost. I didnt need to buy a cheaper system but I wanted to try Ryzen and I am happy I gave AMD my money.

 

[trparky]

Wait. What? I thought DDR4-3200 RAM was a necessity for a recommended Ryzen build? Are you guys saying that if I build a system tomorrow I don't necessarily have to buy 3200 and that I could get away with 3000 RAM instead and not see that much of a difference?

 

[cdawall]

Wait. What? I thought DDR4-3200 RAM was a necessity for a recommended Ryzen build? Are you guys saying that if I build a system tomorrow I don't necessarily have to buy 3200 and that I could get away with 3000 RAM instead and not see that much of a difference?

Get samsung -b modules and just overclock them as far as they go. Quite honestly the 3000/3200 bin doesn't make much difference the actual chips are making it all.

 

[GoldenX]

...There's just too many unknowns yet for many of us to trust Ryzen over Intel.

Freaking PRICE man, have you seen the price of an 6900K+motherboard compared to a R7 1700+B350?, or an 7600K+good OC motherboard compared to a R5 1400+B350? AMD doesn't have to beat Intel in everything to sell well, like the Phenom II did against Nehalem. Now that I remember, the Phenom offered more cores (PII x6) and good enough performance, withput needing an expensive motherboard (I had a 980BE on a 770 chipset, and overclocked it to a max of 4700MHz on winter), while the i7 920 (the cheapest one) was expensive, needed a good (expensive) motherboard to overclock properly and was a house heater, like the 7700K.

Intel only solid product right now is the humble G4560, THAT is a good product, without any competition right now.

 

[trparky]

AMD doesn't have to beat Intel in everything to sell well

It comes down to that right there. It doesn't have to be perfect, it doesn't have to be the fastest, it just needs to be good enough and that's what Ryzen appears to be providing to users for a decent price. For the first time in five years we actually have a choice; have our wallets raped by Intel or get good enough performance at a decent price. I don't know about you but I'm going to choose the second option.

 

[GoldenX]

Thanks to Ryzen we finally are going to get a 6 core Intel product that isn't a joke, and I will never forget the current unlocked i3, a dual core (like those from 2005, remember?) at $180, with virtually the same performance as the $64 Pentium G4560.
We used to have quad cores at $100 7 years ago, remember the Athlon II x4?

 

[trparky]

I will never forget the current unlocked i3, a dual core (like those from 2005, remember?) at $180, with virtually the same performance as the $64 Pentium G4560.

Say what? Is that true?

 

[GoldenX]

Intel Core i3 7350K: http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_i3/Intel-Core i3 i3-7350K.html

 

[trparky]

Intel Core i3 7350K: http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_i3/Intel-Core i3 i3-7350K.html

Dafuq? Epic fail Intel, epic fail.

 

[EntropyZ]

Are you certain they're Samsung "B"? 3200 CL 14-14-14 probably CL 16 probably not

Oh they are most definitely not, only G.Skill so far has guaranteed "B" dies. Corsair is sitting on their laurels to provide Ryzen compatible high clock speed modules.

Also off-topic, Corsair Link doesn't work with my RAM simply because I am not using the first RAM slots, using those would downgrade the clock speed even further as-is. Doesn't matter, it's not like the LED breathing mode as only option right now makes me value them less. It's the friggen clock speed which that won't run as advertised.

 

[N-Gen]

Reporting after the 1201 bios flash. So far I had no cold boot issues.

RAM problem persists however this time instead of reading only 16GB post 2666, it's doing it post 2880. I did manage to boot at 2880 at some point but now it's back to giving me problems. I still have the timing issue as well, manually setting them up to CL16 but the board is forcing CL15. Them booting at 2880 CL15 wasn't a bad thing but I'm really trying to get my 3000 here, lol.

 

[Kanan]

Actually for AMD, the higher the better because the Infinity Fabric runs at same clock then. And I've seen some tests where 3600 MHz basically negated the CCX cross communication penalty in games, pitting 1800X CPU's against 7700K in pretty much everything.

For Intel, sweet spot is actually 2666 MHz where you have the largest gains. Beyond that you're paying way more for hardly any benefits.

Those are just a few chaoticaly programmed games that profit that much from ram speeds for ccx increasement. Usually 2933-3200 ram speed is the sweet spot and 2666 the minimum I would buy because under that the performance goes down big time.

Replaced my Single stick of Corsair Veng. LPX 2400MHz which clocked at 2933MHz easy to Corsair Vengeance LED DDR4 3200MHz 2x8GB which only boots at 2666MHz measly on an R5 1600 as per Ryzen official RAM support. Slightly disappointed it didn't go at least to 2933MHz as well. All I could do is lower the voltage and tighten the timings.

These old non-Ryzen optimized DDR4 modules really suck, even though they were Samsung. No wonder they're on sale in my country right now. Corsair probably trying to get rid of old stock. These things were obviously meant for X99/Z170.

Anyone remember X99 being finicky on launch with DDR4 when it was first used?

I'm holding my breath on BIOS updates making 2933MHz possible at some point with Dual-Rank dotted PCBs. I don't know if the board is the limiting factor or most likely scenario that it is the CPU.

AMD already released new agesa code and it will be implemented soon into new bioses to increase ram compatibility.

Plus no one's even HAD a chance to bench Ryzen at over 3200 speed yet, so how do you even know what the benefits beyond that are?

Go and look in YouTube for mindblank tech, he did that. I'm on phone atm so don't expect me to do it.

But that could also be the 1080ti.

It's both of course.

Ppl these days... think gpus are everything. lol

Wait. What? I thought DDR4-3200 RAM was a necessity for a recommended Ryzen build? Are you guys saying that if I build a system tomorrow I don't necessarily have to buy 3200 and that I could get away with 3000 RAM instead and not see that much of a difference?

A "necessity" is 2666 not 3200. 2933-3200 is the sweet spot for perf but if it's too expensive I would simply go for 2666.

(I had a 980BE on a 770 chipset, and overclocked it to a max of 4700MHz on winter), while the i7 920 (the cheapest one) was expensive, needed a good (expensive) motherboard to overclock properly and was a house heater, like the 7700K.

4700 MHz on a phenom? Really? I have hard times believing that. Also calling a 920 and 7700k "heaters" is just ridiculous coming from a Phenom II. Don't get me wrong I had a Phenom II 940 for almost 5 years but I don't concur with your "selective memories". Intel was way more efficient back then and the 7700k is very efficient as well. I concur on the price being too high, whole reason which prevented me to get the 920 in the first place instead got the Phenom II with way cheaper board and ddr2 ram.

Reporting after the 1201 bios flash. So far I had no cold boot issues.

RAM problem persists however this time instead of reading only 16GB post 2666, it's doing it post 2880. I did manage to boot at 2880 at some point but now it's back to giving me problems. I still have the timing issue as well, manually setting them up to CL16 but the board is forcing CL15. Them booting at 2880 CL15 wasn't a bad thing but I'm really trying to get my 3000 here, lol.

I applaud your optimism handling those start up problems without getting angry but I would replace that ram if you could, as it doesn't seem to like Ryzen or the board too much.

 

[N-Gen]

I applaud your optimism handling those start up problems without getting angry but I would replace that ram if you could, as it doesn't seem to like Ryzen or the board too much.

Got the timings in order just doing a few tests this morning. I wouldn't say replacing them right now is the way to go but if it ends up staying like this when very high speed memory is supported I might change them. For now, as long as it's working at a minimum of 2666 with these 4 sticks it's acceptable.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

Look, I don't really care to turn this into an ongoing argument. Just take my point of mentioning it for those interested in higher speed RAM, or not, I don't care, but you ARE being over defensive here. Plus no one's even HAD a chance to bench Ryzen at over 3200 speed yet, so how do you even know what the benefits beyond that are? Clearly you're just trying to defend your purchase of 3200 speed RAM before knowing the results of higher speed after the dividers are released.

This is what I mean by not interested, and not informed. If I say something that doesn't apply to you, just ignore it. Acting all defensive and justified about not being interested in things not even discovered yet is just ludicrous though. And that's without even mentioning that purecain got his 4000 speed at better pricing than the lower speed was in his area.

There's no point to acting like an over defensive fanboy here. His purchase of 4000 was more out of practicality than elitism. Many of us are just eager to see what results are obtained with speeds over 3200 on Ryzen, but I'd rather not speculate like you, and get actual feedback instead. Despite what I say about AMD, I'm only wanting best case scenario so they can actually BE competitive this time around. I mean JEEZ, lay off dude. Time to give it a rest already.

oh sorry cause I quoted you its an argument, my bad
it's a forum, people have difference of opinions and discuss things.... as if you called me a fanboy haha

FYI im not insulted, offended or couldnt give a rats ass, I wasnt being a dick with you so kinda expect the same in return though seems thats a little to ask for, have a good weekend anyway

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Right now, if you want marginally faster but not perciptable higher frame rates - Intel is the obvious choice as the clockspeeds are far superior on a 7700k. Only a cherry picking nut job would deny that. Subjectively, Ryzen 1700X at 3.9Ghz is very smooth - across 3 games (BF1, GRW & Prey)

Are you implying you don't notice smoother gameplay in GTA V too, because that seems to be the most common title mentioned when it comes to Ryzen 8 core playing smoother than Intel.

Freaking PRICE man, have you seen the price of an 6900K+motherboard compared to a R7 1700+B350?.

Seriously though, I know Intel's 6900k is priced ridiculously, but most gamers are comparing the Ryzen 8 core to Intel's quad, namely the 7700k. Maybe when the Coffee Lake 6 core comes out that will change, but let's not kid ourselves here. Most compare their options in at least close price ranges, not astronomically different ones.

oh sorry cause I quoted you its an argument, my bad
it's a forum, people have difference of opinions and discuss things.... as if you called me a fanboy haha

FYI im not insulted, offended or couldnt give a rats ass, I wasnt being a dick with you so kinda expect the same in return though seems thats a little to ask for, have a good weekend anyway

Had you merely "quoted me", there wouldn't have even been an argument. What you DID was fly off the handle as if I labeled you gullible for the RAM you purchased for merely saying AMD dropped the ball (which BTW you ended up admitting by your agreeing the launch was botched). Considering that, I really don't see why you even jumped on me in the first place, especially since you're now kinda implying I'M being the "dick".

It's like no good deed goes unpunished on the net. I call out a manufacturer for screwing up their product planning with manufactures, and somehow I'M the bad guy? I also noticed you still haven't acknowledged that no one really knows yet what the above 3200 benefits in gaming will be, due to no proper dividers yet to do such tests.

Are we seeing yet the prematurity and nonsense of it all, or are we (you) just content to expect everyone else to exude your sense of anxiety and complacency? I mean, at first I was willing to keep it aimed at AMD, but if you want to go toe to toe, I'll tell you full well why they keep making these mistakes. Gullible customers that put up with it, that's why.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

Are you implying you don't notice smoother gameplay in GTA V too, because that seems to be the most common title mentioned when it comes to Ryzen 8 core playing smoother than Intel.


Seriously though, I know Intel's 6900k is priced ridiculously, but most gamers are comparing the Ryzen 8 core to Intel's quad, namely the 7700k. Maybe when the Coffee Lake 6 core comes out that will change, but let's not kid ourselves here. Most compare their options in at least close price ranges, not astronomically different ones.



Had you merely "quoted me", there wouldn't have even been an argument. What you DID was fly off the handle as if I labeled you gullible for the RAM you purchased for merely saying AMD dropped the ball (which BTW you ended up admitting by your agreeing the launch was botched). Considered that, I really don't see why you even jumped on me in the first place. Especailly since you're now kinda implying I'M being the "dick".

It's like no good deed goes unpunished on the net. I call out a manufacturer for screwing up their product planning with manufactures, and somehow I'M the bad guy? I also noticed you still haven't acknowledged that no one really knows yet what the above 3200 benefits in gaming will be, due to no proper dividers yet to do such tests.

Are we seeing yet the premature and nonsense of it all, or are we (you) just content to expect everyone else to exude your sense of anxiety and complacency?

no, I did not "fly off the handle" what's wrong with you man? seriously go and get some more sleep, you have me completely wrong and now the thread is being derailed!

P.S you got PM

 

[Frag_Maniac]

no, I did not "fly off the handle" what's wrong with you man? seriously go and get some more sleep, you have me completely wrong and now the thread is being derailed!

P.S you got PM

I'd really rather you not PM me with insults of "having a bad day" and getting you wrong. Do you really need a history lesson?

You insisted I explain why people want access to higher than 3200 RAM, you accuse me of over generalizing, then in your second post you use BS examples that don't even exist. Get a clue, no one's even had a chance to do proper above 3200 game benching on Ryzen yet due to no proper dividers. Your not grasping that is mostly why this erupted into an argument. You should have just left what you don't understand alone.

And on that note, I'm going to insist you do, with me anyway, because I have very little tolerance for BS. YOU derailed this thread by talking as if assumptions were fact. And another thing, your overuse of emoticons only makes it more obvious you're not talking the conversation seriously enough.

Some of us do our component research diligently, not via assumptions and beers.

 

[infrared]

Chill guys, without being able to hear or see each other it's easy to misunderstand or read things wrong, nobody's the bad guy here!

3600mhz games testing