AMD Ryzen Discussion Thread.

[Nuckles56]

I've got to say that I'm very happy with the Ryzen 5 1500X I'm playing with right now, it happily does 3.9GHz @1.3V using the stock cooler (I'm going to see if I can get a lower voltage for 3.9GHz and push for 4GHz)

 

[Rehmanpa]

I've got to say that I'm very happy with the Ryzen 5 1500X I'm playing with right now, it happily does 3.9GHz @1.3V using the stock cooler (I'm going to see if I can get a lower voltage for 3.9GHz and push for 4GHz)

Everybody who owns one seems to love them, it seems to be for the most part only Intel fanboys who really hate them.

 

[trparky]

If you plan to upgrade maybe every 2 years or so, go with ryzen and a decent mobo.

If I do go Ryzen there is the drop-in upgrade path that the platform provides in the sense that you can just take the old chip out and drop in a new one. You could do that every year if you wanted to. With Intel you can't do that.

I might eventually go down to my local Microcenter and ask some hard questions and see what the fellow geeks at the store say before I make my final decision.

 

[R-T-B]

CPU's don't scale linearly. There are diminishing returns

Not really. i7 7700k is damn near linear in it's overclock. What's not linear is the voltage needed.

 

[EarthDog]

The Ryzen 5 1600 is $219.99 while the 7700k is $339.99. No reason at that price difference to buy the 7700k over the 1600.

800 mhz clockspeed difference is one reason. If you overclock, figure that ends up a ghz difference. That translates into some fps and chews into a core lead as well.

If I do go Ryzen there is the drop-in upgrade path that the platform provides in the sense that you can just take the old chip out and drop in a new one. You could do that every year if you wanted to. With Intel you can't do that.

I might eventually go down to my local Microcenter and ask some hard questions and see what the fellow geeks at the store say before I make my final decision.

lol, you are much better off asking here... MC is a step up from geek squad, but.... yeah.

Not really. i7 7700k is damn near linear in it's overclock. What's not linear is the voltage needed.

unless its not stable, thats spot on for intel.

 

[trparky]

MC is a step up from geek squad

That depends upon the idiot squad group, some are better than others while others are... not the brightest LED in the Amazon box.

 

[Rehmanpa]

Not really. i7 7700k is damn near linear in it's overclock. What's not linear is the voltage needed.

800 mhz clockspeed difference is one reason. If you overclock, figure that ends up a ghz difference. That translates into some fps and chews into a core lead as well.


lol, you are much better off asking here... MC is a step up from geek squad, but.... yeah.

unless its not stable, thats spot on for intel.

If you look at the actual FPS differences it's hardly anything practical. You should read some of my previous posts on this forum that discusses this. Also if you overclock the 7700k to 5.0ghz you'll also overclock the 1600 to 3.9ghz or higher, and at that point it really catches up because overclocking does not scale linearly.

 

[Rehmanpa]

If I do go Ryzen there is the drop-in upgrade path that the platform provides in the sense that you can just take the old chip out and drop in a new one. You could do that every year if you wanted to. With Intel you can't do that.

I might eventually go down to my local Microcenter and ask some hard questions and see what the fellow geeks at the store say before I make my final decision.

I'd wait a little bit longer dude, threadrippers pricing is getting released, and if the rumors are accurate it could lower current processors down even further (the 1700 is now $299 at newegg).

 

[trparky]

I don't need eight cores, six would be enough along with SMT.

you'll also overclock the 1600 to 3.9ghz or higher

I thought that's damn near impossible. I've read elsewhere that unless you win the silicon lottery the most you'll get is 3.8 if you're lucky.

 

[EarthDog]

If you look at the actual FPS differences it's hardly anything practical. You should read some of my previous posts on this forum that discusses this. Also if you overclock the 7700k to 5.0ghz you'll also overclock the 1600 to 3.9ghz or higher, and at that point it really catches up because overclocking does not scale linearly.

ive read your posts.

Reading my previous post again, youll find ive already ckmpensated for the overclocking ryzen can do...since that chip hits 4ghz, give or take 100mhz, and 7700k hits 5ghz regularly, i came up with that 1 ghz difference.

As far as fps really matters... true, its only a few % difference. Some just dont want to put any glass ceiling on their performance. Where it shines in gaming is with any which can jse more than 8 threads... which many still cannot. In 3 years, perhaps the story will change. For nkw, its ipc and clock speed which shows greater performamce.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11244...x-vs-core-i5-review-twelve-threads-vs-four/12

That depends upon the idiot squad group, some are better than others while others are... not the brightest LED in the Amazon box.

Just saying, well, laughing (sorry), at going to MC when you have a forum where half the people on here know more than MC peeps.

 

[Rehmanpa]

I don't need eight cores, six would be enough along with SMT.


I thought that's damn near impossible. I've read elsewhere that unless you win the silicon lottery the most you'll get is 3.8 if you're lucky.

It's not that bad I don't think. Last time i checked like 70% of chips (maybe higher iirc) can get 3.9ghz.

 

[R-T-B]

If you look at the actual FPS differences it's hardly anything practical. You should read some of my previous posts on this forum that discusses this. Also if you overclock the 7700k to 5.0ghz you'll also overclock the 1600 to 3.9ghz or higher, and at that point it really catches up because overclocking does not scale linearly.

FPS is often gpu-bound and a bad test of whether "a cpu scales linearly." I stand by my statement.

 

[Rehmanpa]

ive read your posts.

Reading my previous post again, youll find ive already ckmpensated for the overclocking ryzen can do...since that chip hits 4ghz, give or take 100mhz, and 7700k hits 5ghz regularly, i came up with that 1 ghz difference.

As far as fps really matters... true, its only a few % difference. Some just dont want to put any glass ceiling on their performance. Where it shines in gaming is with any which can jse more than 8 threads... which many still cannot. In 3 years, perhaps the story will change. For nkw, its ipc and clock speed which shows greater performamce.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11244...x-vs-core-i5-review-twelve-threads-vs-four/12

First off not all games show much of an fps difference, and the games that do are usually about or less than 10 percent. 10 percent, that's like 10 fps vs 11 fps. Who needs 160fps when you have a 145fps

FPS is often gpu-bound and a bad test of whether "a cpu scales linearly." I stand by my statement.

Check out this forum here:
https://linustechtips.com/main/topi...e-boost-does-an-overclock-give-anyway/?page=2

CPU Scaling does not scale linearly with overclocking. An example from this post is, if you overclock your cpu by 20%, you will not gain a 20% performance increase.

 

[R-T-B]

Run CPU-z bench (or any actual cpu-bench) and you'll find it does. That's really not up for debate, at least on intel. Will a 20% faster cpu scaled linearly from a 20% OC make your computer automatically 20% faster? No, of course not. There are more subsystems at play. That does not change the fact the CPU OC IS linear.

I feel the point you are arguing is getting lost in the details of your chosen use case (gaming).

The same argument would apply if you simply bought a 20% faster cpu, which is of course a 100% linear cpu performance boost.

 

[Rehmanpa]

Run CPU-z bench (or any actual cpu-bench) and you'll find it does. That's really not up for debate, at least on intel. Will a 20% faster cpu scaled linearly from a 20% OC make your computer automatically 20% faster? No, of course not. There are more subsystems at play. That does not change the fact the CPU OC IS linear.

I feel the point you are arguing is getting lost in the details of your chosen use case (gaming).

The same argument would apply if you simply bought a 20% faster cpu, which is of course a 100% linear cpu performance boost.

But it doesn't scale linearly in gaming (at least as far as I and everybody on that forum I linked are). Going from 4 to 5ghz is a 25 percent increase in clock speed, but you will not get 25 percent more fps.

 

[R-T-B]

But it doesn't scale linearly in gaming (at least as far as I and everybody on that forum I linked are). Going from 4 to 5ghz is a 25 percent increase in clock speed, but you will not get 25 percent more fps.

Neither would a 25% faster cpu, even if you bought it clocked that much faster at stock.

The cpu itself is scaling linearly, is my point. Gaming gains are a whole different animal, you are correct.

 

[toilet pepper]

Rise of the Tomb Raider and The Division just got updated with Ryzen optimization which made the gaming gap between intel and amd cpus narrower.

 

[Rehmanpa]

Rise of the Tomb Raider and The Division just got updated with Ryzen optimization which made the gaming gap between intel and amd cpus narrower.

Sweet! I'm excited seeing more and more of this, especially with their ram update to allow for higher speed ram, and especially with the inevitable fact that programs/games will start to use more and more threads (there are already quite a few, but the number is growing). It's also worth mentioning that the Ryzen 1700 and i7 7700k have no discernible difference between each other in VR. Ryzen works just as well as a 7700k for VR (because they're both easily able to get more than 90FPS, which in reality is enough and it's the headset's limit). Here's a GREAT demonstration by Gamers Nexus for VR between the 1700 and 7700k:

 

[R-T-B]

Anyone have any idea what I can expect from 4 single-sided sticks of Samsung B-Die ram (8GB per stick). My kit is rated for 3200Mhz, but I understand that 4 sticks is a bit much to expect the full 3200.

I plan on using AGESA 1.0.0.6

My 1800X and GIGABYTE Aorus Gaming 5 are arriving tomorrow.

 

[Rehmanpa]

Anyone have any idea what I can expect from 4 single-sided sticks of Samsung B-Die ram (8GB per stick). My kit is rated for 3200Mhz, but I understand that 4 sticks is a bit much to expect the full 3200.

I plan on using AGESA 1.0.0.6

What motherboard/processor are you going to be using with it?

 

[R-T-B]

What motherboard/processor are you going to be using with it?

Just edited that in, heh.

 

[Rehmanpa]

Just edited that in, heh.

Wow man I'm jealous of that processor/mobo, that's the mobo I wanted lol. I think if you update the bios first that you'll have decent luck with the ram, I'm quite interested in hearing about how it goes, please keep us posted!!
This is the mobo I'm looking at for my planned ryzen build (depending on threadripper pricing):
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813145001&ignorebbr=1
I think it's your motherboard just with the whole "rev.1.0"
I was gonna get 2x16gb ddr4 sticks, hopefully those would work to.

 

[R-T-B]

Wow man I'm jealous of that processor/mobo, that's the mobo I wanted lol. I think if you update the bios first that you'll have decent luck with the ram, I'm quite interested in hearing about how it goes, please keep us posted!!
This is the mobo I'm looking at for my planned ryzen build (depending on threadripper pricing):
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813145001&ignorebbr=1
I think it's your motherboard just with the whole "rev.1.0"
I was gonna get 2x16gb ddr4 sticks, hopefully those would work to.

The K5 is actually a slightly higher SKU than mine, but it seems to lag behind in their bios releases. Not to say it's not an excellent board, just be prepared to get the last update out of the series of boards for whatever reason. One reason I chose the gaming 5 was it gets really early AGESA releases.

As sort of the "TPU Ryzen bios update-guy" around here, I know a thing or two about the software release schedules they tend to follow.

 

[FR@NK]

what I can expect from 4 single-sided sticks of Samsung B-Die ram

Just use 2 sticks. 16GB should be fine for most workloads anyways.

I was gonna get 2x16gb ddr4 sticks, hopefully those would work to.

From what I've seen, the 16GB sticks are dual rank. Just get two single rank 8GB samsung B sticks.

 

[Rehmanpa]

Just use 2 sticks. 16GB should be fine for most workloads anyways.



From what I've seen, the 16GB sticks are dual rank. Just get two single rank 8GB samsung B sticks.

I admit I don't know much about ram, but what's wrong with using 2x16gb ddr4 sticks and then getting 2 more later?