AMD Ryzen Discussion Thread.

[Artas1984]

If you all just think for a minute or two...

Ever since the release of the FX Piledriver processors in 2012, AMD has not improved anything in the high performance market. The FX-8350 and later FX processors were beaten in games and single-threaded programs by Core i5 2500K and in content creation and multi-threaded programs by Core i7 2600K respectively...

Just the fact that AMD made competitive processors after FIVE YEARS (unheard) of literal absence those rival the very top of Intel lineup processors deserves your gratitude even if you are die-hard Intel fan! After Intel released first Core 2 Duo processors i started bashing AMD, and even more so after Bulldozer was launched, but i never was an anti AMD guy originally!

In fact the biggest FUN in my life that i ever had in terms of computer testing and overclocking came from N-force 4 days with S939 system-boards like DFI LanParty NF4 SLI-DR. Back then the Athlon 64 was much cheaper than Pentium and when overclocked offered better performance. This is the same kind of return now!

 

[the54thvoid]

Just have to get power into it and give it a whirl...

There's 1700X somewhere in there.

 

[P4-630]

Don't know if it has been posted already but here:

AMD Ryzen 5 1600 already selling
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-ryzen-5-1600-already-selling.html

 

[uuuaaaaaa]

Just have to get power into it and give it a whirl...

There's 1700X somewhere in there.

How is the TR Le Grand Macho handling the thermals?

 

[phanbuey]

Guys, new bios updates do make a difference...

same OC settings prior scores were 159 and 1779.....

this is on ASUS X370 Prime but im sure the other vendors have the same updates coming in.


EDIT also huge boost in farcry 4: 102 fps to 114 fps same scene farcry 4 (take with a grain of salt, what i use to bench)
EDIT2 random slowdowns gone too..... used to drop to 60fps....

 

[uuuaaaaaa]

Guys, new bios updates do make a difference...

View attachment 85474

same OC settings prior scores were 159 and 1779.....

this is on ASUS X370 Prime but im sure the other vendors have the same updates coming in.


EDIT also huge boost in farcry 4: 102 fps to 114 fps same scene farcry 4 (take with a grain of salt, what i use to bench)
EDIT2 random slowdowns gone too..... used to drop to 60fps....

This looks promising too (3600MHz memory):

 

[the54thvoid]

Running at 3200Mhz on memory - I'm not sure if it's worth testing my board (CH6). I've read so much about BIOS bricking and problems with people boosting over specified amounts. I think for me, the G.Skill kit running at it's design speed is fast enough and any overclock on top isn't going top pay back dividends. I'll need to OC the 1700X instead and play with that for a while withe the TR LGM cooler.

 

[HD64G]

I do understand your reasoning, but part of the reason that Intel updates its boards so often is because it tends to offer more with each platform. Although the main CPU core in KabyLake isn't that much different from SandyBridge, the entire platform around that core has changed in huge ways, adding in things like PCIe 3.0, USB 3.1, M.2/U.2, better audio chips as well as better UEFI implementations. So why AMD has not changed their platform in many years, their boards quickly grew outdated, and the same is likely to happen with AM4.

To me, that's the real flaw in Ryzen; the platform that surrounds it. What AMD has done with Ryzen is adjusted core CPU performance to match the times, and then gone and removed the iGP that Intel has on it's mainstream platform, and provided more CPU cores in that space. With that, AM4 is NOT a high-end platform. Mainstream platforms get quickly outdated, and AMD will need to have new boards out with better features when they do release an updated ZEN-based CPU, just like Intel has done over the years when they had their good core design; incremental differences in CPU performance, but huge changes in the hardware that supports it. That is the future I see for AMD. So if you are cool with that, then by all means buy Ryzen.

But buy it because it gets rid of the useless iGP, and replaced that with usable cores. That is the true strength of Ryzen, and I haven't seen a review talk about that at all (but I could have missed it)

Not being unable to use your Mobo when the next arch iteration comes out is a clear advantage imho. Whenever you need to change the mobo to get new features or take advantage of faster RAM it can be done but being obligatory is customer unfriendly and in that, AMD is always better than the Intel's miling strategy to give us 5-10% more performance each 2 years by changing CPU & Mobo and maybe even the RAM.

 

[Super XP]

Ryzen needs Fast Ram. As fast as possible. Then it defeats Intel in PC Gaming.

 

[Tatty_Two]

Be nice if they compared the 2 again but both with 3600mhz ram, that would give me a fuller picture.

 

[EarthDog]

Be nice if they compared the 2 again but both with 3600mhz ram, that would give me a fuller picture.

That and the vid this was sourced from (#306 for the record since it wasn't sourced) keeps switching places for things making it extremely difficult to read and walk away with anything from it...

The scaling doesn't seem to support the price difference from 3000-3600...

 

[r9]

No offense but I think that anyone who built a Ryzen rig wasted their money. A five year old Core i5 3570k Ivy Bridge chip not only kicked Ryzen's ass but kicked all the way down town.

AMD Ryzen 7 1700 vs. a 5-year-old gaming PC, or why you should never preorder | PCWorld

PCWorld

While I was pleasantly surprised by the ultimate AMD machine’s performance, the more mainstream Ryzen 7 1700 build left a bitter taste in my mouth. I wasn’t expecting it to blow Intel’s 3570K out of the water, but I was hoping for some sort of performance pick-me-up, or at least parity. Instead, Intel’s quad-core, 5-year-old chip smoked Ryzen in two out of the three games tested—and I mean smoked—and the CPUs traded blows in the third.

Wow.​

I was really rooting for AMD here but once again we had our hopes dashed against the rocks. To have a five year old Intel chip thoroughly kick Ryzen's ass is pretty damn bad. You had your chance AMD and like always, you blew it.

The fact is that 7700k is at its peak right now. Same shit different packaging from Intel.
On the other hand even though you think Ryzen is waste of money at least it did on thing right.
And that is to force Intel to drop prices and I bet that in couple months after Ryzen 5 is out they will have to do it again.
All the games are build around quad core high clock CPU aka 7700k so no updates or patches will ever improve the performance of 7700k in the future.
On the other side AMD will have BIOS updates that will have higher memory support which will allow for the Infinity Fabric to run at higher clock and give significant boost in gaming.
Even though AMD will not admit that Windows Scheduler needs patching (probable because its their fault not to work it out with Microsoft in time) the current patch already increased performance and its still not perfect there is more to come.
Chess benchmark increase by 10% and UT3 by 35%.
There are patches on their way from the game developers.
Dota 2 patch increases Ryzen performance by 25-30%.
Not to mention all the future games that will be optimized for Ryzen coming out.
Have anyone tried running something parallel while gaming, those spare Ryzen threads will come handy.
And I read something very interesting recently.
Can't remember the site but what they did is they compared the fx8350 to i5 2500 performance during the years.
This is what they found out from fx8350 being 15% behind i5 2500 end up being %10 ahead.
Thats a 25% jump.
And that is nothing compared to what to expect with Ryzen once all I mentioned above is being ironed out

This looks promising too (3600MHz memory):

+1

I wish I saw your video before I posted above.
I would have saved myself I lot of time.

 

[Hotobu]

Not being unable to use your Mobo when the next arch iteration comes out is a clear advantage imho. Whenever you need to change the mobo to get new features or take advantage of faster RAM it can be done but being obligatory is customer unfriendly and in that, AMD is always better than the Intel's miling strategy to give us 5-10% more performance each 2 years by changing CPU & Mobo and maybe even the RAM.

It's with this in mind that, as someone who's building a 4K, I should go with Ryzen. I'm thinking that right now I can save a little over $100 and go with a Ryzen 6 core that will give me equivalent performance for a while, and perhaps, with any luck, will outright beat a 7700K if developers start to optimize for > 4 cores. Then when CPU performance trails off I can pop in Zen 2, or 3 and not have to buy a new motherboard.

 

[the54thvoid]

I know this isn't a benchmark thread burt this is everyuthing at stock with the free Timespy bench.... I have no idea if it is any good - remember - no overclock on anything.

 

[notb]

Then when CPU performance trails off I can pop in Zen 2, or 3 and not have to buy a new motherboard.

I've seen this theory being spread all over the internet.
Are you sure? Where is this certainty coming from? I've seen no guarantees from AMD.

Anyway, looking at my PC history, I've never updated a CPU to something on the same socket (so automatically: without replacing the motherboard).
I'm really wondering if people are really updating the CPUs as often as it is being suggested.

I'm currently preparing a list of parts for my new desktop - built around the i5-7600.
I couldn't care less about this socket being replaced soon, but I value highly the fact that this is a well tested platform.
I expect this PC to work until 2022 (if it doesn't die on the way). At that point both Intel and AMD will have replaced their sockets twice.

 

[uuuaaaaaa]

I've seen this theory being spread all over the internet.
Are you sure? Where is this certainty coming from? I've seen no guarantees from AMD.

Anyway, looking at my PC history, I've never updated a CPU to something on the same socket (so automatically: without replacing the motherboard).
I'm really wondering if people are really updating the CPUs as often as it is being suggested.

I'm currently preparing a list of parts for my new desktop - built around the i5-7600.
I couldn't care less about this socket being replaced soon, but I value highly the fact that this is a well tested platform.
I expect this PC to work until 2022 (if it doesn't die on the way). At that point both Intel and AMD will have replaced their sockets twice.

AMD themselves have confirmed that socket AM4 will be here for zen2 and 3.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I know this isn't a benchmark thread burt this is everyuthing at stock with the free Timespy bench.... I have no idea if it is any good - remember - no overclock on anything.

As a nice comparison i get 7200 at (8350)4.8ghz and two 480s at 1400, ie looks good to me

Tweaking with upgrade itchinessbut skint

 

[notb]

AMD themselves have confirmed that socket AM4 will be here for zen2 and 3.

Socket AM4 - yes.
They said nothing about backward compatibility with Zen motherboards.

 

[Tatty_Two]

Whilst socket longevity is of course a good thing, to reap the benefits you in part have to sacrifice chipset features so after 3-5 years what will we be missing out on? I would guess that quite a few will still change their AM4 board for another with an updated set of features sometime down the road, I did exactly that moving from 1366 to Z97, I was very happy with my old 930 @ 4.4gig but I was not happy with slower ram speeds, no SATA 3 or USB3 etc.

 

[notb]

I would guess that quite a few will still change their AM4 board for another with an updated set of features sometime down the road

True. E.g. from what I've seen you have to spend a bit more to get dual PCIe M.2 compared to current Intel-based motherboards. This could change in the next generation.

But let's not forget Ryzen is a SoC design - quite a bit more features are CPU-dependent than what we got used to. Replacing a mobo might not help.

E.g. even going for the top X370 mobo for your AMD APU leaves you with a fairly pedestrian number of PCIe lanes, which will cripple GPU and storage performance. We'll see if Zen APU is any better, but honestly - this makes the platform somehow difficult, if you're dependent on something else than raw processing power...

 

[EarthDog]

Whilst socket longevity is of course a good thing, to reap the benefits you in part have to sacrifice chipset features so after 3-5 years what will we be missing out on? I would guess that quite a few will still change their AM4 board for another with an updated set of features sometime down the road, I did exactly that moving from 1366 to Z97, I was very happy with my old 930 @ 4.4gig but I was not happy with slower ram speeds, no SATA 3 or USB3 etc.

Ive been saying this all along in the AM4 will last longer go to it discussion. I mean who will sit there just to get another CPU, but miss out on the some of the latest goodies? Makes no sense to me unless you know you literally sit on it, garbage it and get another in 3+ years.

 

[Hotobu]

Ive been saying this all along in the AM4 will last longer go to it discussion. I mean who will sit there just to get another CPU, but miss out on the some of the latest goodies? Makes no sense to me unless you know you literally sit on it, garbage it and get another in 3+ years.

But I still get the option to choose. If I decide the features are worth it then I buy a new mobo. If not I save about $200. It's win/win.

 

[EarthDog]

Yes.. your choices are to pay as much as 7700K (1700 $330), or $70 more (1700X - $400), or $270 more (1800X - $50), and drop a CPU into the same mobo. The point is, when considering TCO (total cost of ownership) The Intel CPU is right there. It really depends on your productivity needs (as I don't buy into all the "zOMG MOAR COARS will be good for gaming zomgbbq!" By the time less than 8 threads HINDERS performance in more than a handful of games is the day these many core chips hold their value across the gamut. until then... I'd rather stick with a more mature and proven platform...

... let's talk in 6 months when things are ironed out on the gaming side.

 

[phanbuey]

Yes.. your choices are to pay as much as 7700K (1700 $330), or $70 more (1700X - $400), or $270 more (1800X - $50), and drop a CPU into the same mobo. The point is, when considering TCO (total cost of ownership) The Intel CPU is right there. It really depends on your productivity needs (as I don't buy into all the "zOMG MOAR COARS will be good for gaming zomgbbq!" By the time less than 8 threads HINDERS performance in more than a handful of games is the day these many core chips hold their value across the gamut. until then... I'd rather stick with a more mature and proven platform...

... let's talk in 6 months when things are ironed out on the gaming side.

i mean that is sound... but these are not gaming chips, and even for general purpose they have an amazing amount of allure...

Not all people who drive pickup trucks are hauling sh*T 100% of the time, but the capability to do so carries real value even when you're not using it.

I mean i can get a chip that with an easy OC punches in the same league as the 6950X for $330 for a variety of workloads... there is nothing from intel that can do that.

 

[hat]

Ryzen needs Fast Ram. As fast as possible. Then it defeats Intel in PC Gaming.

That's not really a surprise. Even with Intel, fast RAM has been shown to make a difference, even in gaming. AMD's new platform has had a real rough start, especially with memory comparability.