Editorial AMD's Ryzen Debut: Onwards to the HEDT Market or The Stumbling Hype Train

[birdie]

Maybe it's just me but, it might've had something to do with you calling several people idiots because they were arguing with you?

Arguing with what? What inane utterings bearing zero ground while I keep pouring facts, charts and quotes from reputable reviewers? Why am I replying to yet another hollow post by an AMD fanatic? Why? No one in this thread has anything to refute my findings - they are not "mine" per se, they are common knowledge but for some reasons AMD fans just cannot accept this.

Ten bucks says your wrong, as the next Scorpio is an AMD SoC just like the last two, & there's also a possibility that PS5 (or even Scorpio) is Zen based. Zen, where it stands today is excellent VFM, across the board.

Let's make it $1000, ok?

Do you have anything to do with software development? I'm quite sure absolutely nothing 'cause if you had, then you'd never mention some future game consoles or CPUs. We are talking about current games and current CPUs. Can you even read, sir? It's not an offense but my post clearly talked about existing games, yet you need to mention some future yet to be seen products.

That's the problem with the AMD fans: they live by waiting for the miracles of future optimizations specifically for AMD products. TWIMTP causes an incredible butthurt and all the hell breaks lose and you're screaming that NVIDIA is basically cheating and lying and they are just pure evil, while AMD says they directly sponsored (read: paid) DICE, Bethesda and 300 other studios to make their games run better on AMD GPUs, and no one bats an eyelid.

Freaking hypocrisy from AMD fans all day long, 365 days a year.

The bigger problem with gaming speed doesn't look like its specific compilation, but that cache calls are going across core complexes, saturating the fabric between the two. This might be the Bulldozer argument all over again (and I'm really sorry if this is), but improved OS level schedulers that are more aware of where they are dumping threads may completely solve this problem.

We'll see. I'm 99.99% sure Windows 7 won't have any updates to support Ryzen better, while Windows 10 is still hated by far too many and even its nightly builds don't have any optimizations to address this issue.

 

[Prince Valiant]

On second thought. Never mind.

 

[Super XP]

There is one interesting thing I've been reading about regarding the 7700k versus Ryzen. I would say, the majority of reviewers are complaining about the 7700k suffering from some sort of constant stuttering. The Ryzen may have less FPS, but maintains consistent smoothness and remains stutter free, but not for the 7700k.

I wonder if this is a issue with the processor or it requires a patch. In that respect, they recommend the Ryzen over the 7700k, due to No Ryzen stuttering & the fact Ryzen is newer, and therefore will last longer. Ryzen enhancements are coming out too.

 

[Super XP]

I'm ok with TPU delaying the review. A lot of the "early" reviews were somewhat shallow and inconsistent. Rushed even.
There is no doubt that most reviews have been affected by unfinished EFI, memory incompatibility, SMT and HPET problems, etc... Why rush to review a buggy platform ?

The kind of review I want to see would include Memory scaling/perf, USB3.1G2 and sata transfer speeds, price/perf, etc...

99.9% of all Ryzen reviews were done days/weeks before Ryzen's actual launch. I am OK with the initial reviews, but the reviewers should have known about Ryzen needing various optimizations, AM4 needing bios updates (ASUS messed that up real bad), Windows 10 needing updates.

I would assume comparison benchmarks will be coming out, as soon as developers & MS optimize for Ryzen. Once this happens, I personally can see huge performance gains all across the board. Not just in gaming. If you read the paper work on Ryzen's interesting so called SOC design, AMD has put some serious thought in it, and longevity was one of them. Smart indeed. This thing is a beast lol

 

[Camm]

There is one interesting thing I've been reading about regarding the 7700k versus Ryzen. I would say, the majority of reviewers are complaining about the 7700k suffering from some sort of constant stuttering.

This magical no stutter has been known by guys running 6 cores+ for years, all it is simply is that you have more threads for OS tasks, your web browser, etc, so anything executing has a lower chance of executing on a thread a game is using. Its not some secret Ryzen special sauce. Of course, 6 cores+ has been pretty unobtainable by most until now.

 

[Super XP]

This magical no stutter has been known by guys running 6 cores+ for years, all it is simply is that you have more threads for OS tasks, your web browser, etc, so anything executing has a lower chance of executing on a thread a game is using. Its not some secret Ryzen special sauce. Of course, 6 cores+ has been pretty unobtainable by most until now.

I'm only going by actual game play based Benchmarks. Controlled, nothing extra running just the game.
Anyhow, stuttering in game is a serious issue with the 7700k. Because it seems to only happen with that processor.

 

[Ungari]

I've had Ryzen for nearly 48 hours, and I really feel this is BD 2.0, but this time, its actually exciting. Needs more frequency, seems a bit overpriced, but works amazingly well when you need all those cores. When you don't need the cores, the IPC is really close to intel, but Intel is just faster in raw clocks right now. Base speed is low, but so is power consumption, where BD had high power use.

I've never seen anyone not be utterly thrilled by the pricing.
Only at TPU...

 

[cadaveca]

I've never seen anyone not be utterly thrilled by the pricing.
Only at TPU...

The price difference doesn't justify the cost here in Canada, making KabyLake the best option for your dollar for gaming. A 7700K is currently $500, while an 1800X is $670. At the same price, I'd choose the 1800X, but with that $170 added cost to buy what I see as the Ryzen equivalent, I cannot recommend the 1800X to anyone except those that have use for the added cores right this second (ie, those that do tonnes of encoding or similar stuff).

In the US, a 7700K is $350 (455 CAD), while the 1800X is $500 (650 CAD).

It is what it is. If the 1800X was only $50 more, I'd be all for it. $150 is too much for a GAMER.

 

[Grings]

You could end up spending more than $150 extra just on ram and motherboard at the moment going for ryzen

most of the cheaper 3200mhz 16gb ram kits you can find at the moment are dual sided kits, the only decent kits i can find here compatible with ryzen (or on asus or asrock ram qvl's) cost a fair bit more

plus at the moment only the taichi and crosshair boards seem any good for 3200 ram and 4+ghz, where you can get a capable Zx70 board for almost half the cost

 

[cadaveca]

You could end up spending more than $150 extra just on ram and motherboard at the moment going for ryzen

most of the cheaper 3200mhz 16gb ram kits you can find at the moment are dual sided kits, the only decent kits i can find here compatible with ryzen (or on asus or asrock ram qvl's) cost a fair bit more

plus at the moment only the taichi and crosshair boards seem any good for 3200 ram and 4+ghz, where you can get a capable Zx70 board for almost half the cost

Only if you aren't buying a whole new PC like many are anyway. The Taichi is only $200. $50 cheaper than the ASUS (which I can't recommend at this point.)

 

[Ungari]

I have to say the RAM pricing at the higher speeds is disgusting, especially since most are offering single rank sticks as a kit and not one at a time.