AMD Ryzen 7 7700

[Assimilator]

Ok, i undestand the whole thing.
But why it has to be done every times ?
I'm asking because the silicon on the RAM doesn't change every time.
It's like an OC of a processor, when you got the good timings and the stability you want, it's ok for good, you don't have to re-do the OC stuff again every lauch.

Because you the user can easily shut down your PC, pull out the current memory modules, replace them with different ones, turn the PC back on and expect everything to Just Work.

"But I haven't changed my memory modules" you say. Well the UEFI has no way of knowing that because there's no way (AFAIK) to reliably "fingerprint" a specific memory module, so it can't trust that the 16GB module that was in RAM slot 1 yesterday is the same 16GB module in RAM slot 1 today. If it did, and the memory module was actually different, and it simply applied the same timings as it had previously used, the system would probably fall over.

And that's the number one thing that users don't want: instability. So the UEFI spends more time in the boot process to ensure that the system is less unstable.

Why is this only a problem for DDR5? Because DDR4 has been around so long that all its quirks and weirdnesses are well-known and understood and coded into the UEFI, so there's no need for your system to to spend lots of time learning DDR4 module characteristics. But DDR5 is new and AM5 is new and AMD hasn't figured out DDR5 on AM5 completely yet, so they're being cautious with boot times to ensure that people don't complain that AM5 is an unstable platform. As the platform matures the boot times will come down (we've already seen this) until eventually they'll be at DDR4 levels again.

 

[LuxZg]

Platform cost is high but not more so than Intel's DDR5 offerings. Also you need to consider that many B660 and B760 boards will cripple the K-series CPUs due to their inadequate power delivery.

Both company's DDR5 boards are expensive. I do not know what they can do about it, though.

So many memory posts, and I came to see what people say about THIS

IMHO I have a feeling that there's a lot of apples to oranges in platform costs, even from renowned reviewers like the Wiz here.

Here is the conclusion:
the non-X includes a solid cooler, which will easily save you 30-50 bucks. ... the cheapest B650 boards are around $200! Intel clearly has the better offerings here, with plenty of boards in the $150 to $200 range and below. While Intel lets you use DDR4 memory, AMD is betting on DDR5 ... Strong competition comes from Intel models like the Core i5-13600K ($320) or the Core i5-12700K ($325). ... the 13700K ($430), ... and the lower motherboard cost on Intel will let them offset that cost.

So how do we get from 320$ 7700 minus 30-50$ vs 320$ 13600K that has 50$ cheaper MBOs to - huge platform cost difference? To me it's 7700 (320$) + 200$ MBO vs 13600K + 150$ MBO + 30-50$ cooler, so 0-20$ difference. That's by prices in that paragraph.

Then we jump to 430$ 13700K that needs that 50$ cooler and I doubt anyone will run it on 150$ MBO, but let's give that a go, and that's still 100$ difference, certainly no way to "offset the cost" except by going with 50$ MBO and 480$ CPU+cooler. Who does that? Did you forget that it's also 150W more power, so larger (and thus more expensive) PSU? Just looks like a leap into... huge black void, like totally senseless sentence, without looking at the WHOLE picture.

And finally we get to that "but Intel has DDR4". Yes. Why not just AM4 then, I mean, using Alder Lake plus cheap DDR4 board you throw away performance and any future-proofing you may have, so then AM4 + 5800X3D is even cheaper and with DDR4 probably just as fast. No upgrade path with either option anyway. And AM4 will actually be way cheaper as there's ton of compatible MBOs for literally funny amount of money. You also save on cooler and PSU due to less power, so no need to (over)spend on either, while not so much with 13700K.

So bunching up all that in same paragraph going from one end to the other, it's just... Deceptive. That should be 3 paragraphs and 3 comparisons, head to tail, no jumping from one premise to unconnected conclusions. Simply taking 13700K numbers from review with same cooler (Noctua) and DDR5 MBO and all, then claiming it's somehow price/perf competitive or in same range as 7700... IDK, i just can't swallow that.

Don't get me wrong, I do agree that AM5 still needs a bit lower prices. But so does equivalent Intel platform. I can't stress this enough - EQUIVALENT! I'm still waiting myself, but when I do go shopping, it will take PLATFORM costs into consideration, that includes cooler, MBO, RAM, power supply, relative performance, platform features (such as PCIe, NVMe, and/or USB versions, as well as upgradeability).

Least of all will I look at - boot times

Anyway, anyone not agreeing, I simply ask to list whole PC on AMD and Intel side, that's performing similar, then compare actual whole PC cost. Not just CPU+MBO(+RAM). There's way more in a PC than that. Oh and don't say getting 13700K for more FPS in games, please, not with a straight face, when same money put into GPU would net better end result. Not unless you already have top end GPU. If you're talking 3070 with 13600/700K then ...just don't and don't forget how many people actually own something faster than that (not on TPU forum, but general population).

Sorry for a rant

 

[AusWolf]

Ok, i undestand the whole thing.
But why it has to be done every times ?
I'm asking because the silicon on the RAM doesn't change every time.
It's like an OC of a processor, when you got the good timings and the stability you want, it's ok for good, you don't have to re-do the OC stuff again every lauch.

Some motherboards have an option to skip memory training after the first successful boot, but it's kind of broken on my MSi Pro B650M. It locks up during boot if I enable it.

 

[bl4C3y3]

The inclusion of the Wraith Prism cooler adds some nice value (in relation to the cost of the CPU). I still have mine that came with a 3900X, and while I eventually switched to water-cooling, it still has its regular use as backup or temporary cooler. The 1700 was about the same price at the time (6y ago), and included the lower performing Wraith Spire ... so when taking inflation into account, you get a better performing cooler bundled with a cheaper CPU ... that's progress

About the memory training and boot topic:
Normal POST sequence takes about 30 sec for me (with EXPO) on MSI MAG B650 Tomahawk.
When turning on "memory context restore", the POST sequence takes 10sec ... I get bluescreens during loading of Windows or after a couple of seconds in Windows.

it's kind of broken on my MSi Pro B650M. It locks up during boot if I enable it.

So at least on MSI B650 motherboards with current BIOS, it seems a good thing it is off by default

 

[Melvis]

Here in Australia you pay just $20 less for a none X version of the CPU, might as well just get the X version......

 

[PenguinBelly]

2-3 min boot is for 4x DIMMs. The ASUS X670E Hero takes forever it seems with 4x 16GB.

I timed with a stop watch. 1 min 8 secs with ASUS B650E-E until the desktop. 4x16GB.

I mean 1 minute is too long and especially for reviewing purpose (dealing with many, I am sure) I can understand the pain, though.

 

[ir_cow]

I timed with a stop watch. 1 min 8 secs with ASUS B650E-E until the desktop. 4x16GB.

I mean 1 minute is too long and especially for reviewing purpose (dealing with many, I am sure) I can understand the pain, though.

The higher the speed, the slower it goes I noticed lol.

About the memory training and boot topic:
Normal POST sequence takes about 30 sec for me (with EXPO) on MSI MAG B650 Tomahawk.
When turning on "memory context restore", the POST sequence takes 10sec ... I get bluescreens during loading of Windows or after a couple of seconds in Windows.

I consider all this save memory timings a beta feature. So far its always worked for me, but I can definitely see it not working on all configurations and mbs correctly. Its not a feature AMD made. so its on the vendors for that one.

 

[AusWolf]

The higher the speed, the slower it goes I noticed lol.


I consider all this save memory timings a beta feature. So far its always worked for me, but I can definitely see it not working on all configurations and mbs correctly. Its not a feature AMD made. so its on the vendors for that one.

Memory speed doesn't affect AM5 as much as it did previous Ryzen platforms as far as I've seen, anyway. Even at JEDEC 4800 MHz, my system is blazing fast. I'm only keeping it at 6000 MHz EXPO for peace of mind, as the 30 sec POST time doesn't bother me at all.

Here in Australia you pay just $20 less for a none X version of the CPU, might as well just get the X version......

Unless you want the boxed cooler and the lower default TDP, I agree.

There seems to be quite a gap here in the UK. I don't regret getting the X version, though. I'll just call it early adopter tax.

(Edit: changed picture size)

 

[KrazyT]

"But I haven't changed my memory modules" you say. Well the UEFI has no way of knowing that because there's no way (AFAIK) to reliably "fingerprint" a specific memory module, so it can't trust that the 16GB module that was in RAM slot 1 yesterday is the same 16GB module in RAM slot 1 today. If it did, and the memory module was actually different, and it simply applied the same timings as it had previously used, the system would probably fall over.

I'm far from being an ingeneer (is the correct word ?), but it seems easy to fix the problem
A memory module should "fingerprint" in the UEFI, and just check if it's the same at lauch
Problem solved !
I suppose they're working on it

 

[Polyc0re]

Thanks for the review W1zzard

I was quite surprised to see that the 5.3 GHZ all-core OC has lower power consumption and higher efficiency than stock in gaming, is that really correct?

 

[Assimilator]

I'm far from being an ingeneer (is the correct word ?), but it seems easy to fix the problem
A memory module should "fingerprint" in the UEFI, and just check if it's the same at lauch
Problem solved !
I suppose they're working on it

Like I said, there's no way to do that, because while memory modules have enough info encoded on them to theoretically allow them to be individually distinguished, in practice manufacturers don't care enough to do this.

 

[trparky]

Why do Microcenters not have this product yet?

 

[The King]

Yes, soon

Soon is taking too long.
j/k

Problem with the CPU, waiting for replacement? or did AMD not send 1 for testing?

 

[W1zzard]

Soon is taking too long.
j/k

Problem with the CPU, waiting for replacement? or did AMD not send 1 for testing?

CPU is here, also bought a few of the new Intels, but I'm retesting all older CPUs on 4090 now, also some updates to tests and new games, and ray tracing. I can retest 3-4 CPUs per day, so 7900 not this week

 

[trparky]

CPU is here, also bought a few of the new Intels, but I'm retesting all older CPUs on 4090 now, also some updates to tests and new games, and ray tracing. I can retest 3-4 CPUs per day, so 7900 not this week

Bought? You mean they don't just send them in a box with a note saying "please test me"?

 

[W1zzard]

Bought? You mean they don't just send them in a box with a note saying "please test me"?

Unfortunately, no .. Intel isn't sampling non-K or KS, so my only option is to either ignore them or buy them