Ryzen price politics

[BeastyBaiter]

It does seem like all the reviewers have no trouble getting the 1700 to 3.9GHz but anything beyond 4.1 is a problem for all 3 models. They've also done some tweaks and gotten game performance up a bit. I think it might be a few more months before we really know how it will play out. The R5-1600X remains the most interesting option to me. I'm very curious if it has greater IPC, we already know the clock on it.

[BitMaster]

From what I have read is that SMT seems to have an impact on game performance and that those guys who seem to know a bit about it say its prolly the way windows tasks the cpu cores,

logic core vs. smt-core and that intel has a different approach aka numbering and thus windows sadly uses the wrong cores and thus kills some speed. Disabling SMT helped in some games to get performance up by up to 20% for some titles, but anywhere from 5-20% on those.

 

They say it could and will likely be fixed by an MS update.

 

 

But actually, at 4.1 XFR clocks and higher than 1080p they already look good enough to not say NO. At 1440p and especially 4k it rivals with the top dogs...and not seldomly wins.

 

 

When you look at real world facts, as I pay my own electricity here in germany with 30 cent/kWh I am astonsied that for the same performance fps wise the 6900k and 59650k needed around 430W needed at wall plug ( SAME GPU in both systems ) and Ryzen took like 90 Watts LESS !!!

 

That's cash on the table at the end of the year. The more money the more you use that PC with all cores. Seen over a period of 3 years in average is quite some money.

 

*based on hardocp forum threads and benchmarks posted there

Edited March 5, 2017 by BitMaster

[Hadwell]

 

 

But actually, at 4.1 XFR clocks and higher than 1080p they already look good enough to not say NO. At 1440p and especially 4k it rivals with the top dogs...and not seldomly wins.

 

*based on hardocp forum threads and benchmarks posted there

 

until a better GPU comes out...

 

see... at 1440p and 4K, it's the GPU that's too slow... in 1 year, maybe 2, that won't be the case...

[BitMaster]

That, hopefully is NOT true :(

 

I got your point and it is a true valid corner stone to look at, well said.

 

Let's see what their 4c/8t can do.

 

Cause to be fair, Inzel's 6 and 8 core beasts aren't game wonders per se themselves. Any of those is smoked by their own dirty little twin sisters, 7600k and 7700k. Both outperform those Intels as well. So lets see what AMD can do with 4 cores only and clocks. I honestly think they know EXACTLY where the need to get to. Look at what they got now, exactly where they need to be.

[SkateZilla]

the Intel 4c i5s perform better in games because they are Clocked 600+MHz Higher.

 

Games also arent using the AMD SMT Correctly.

[Hadwell]

the Intel 4c i5s perform better in games because they are Clocked 600+MHz Higher.

 

Games also arent using the AMD SMT Correctly.

 

and don't forget the fact that the 7700K can easily hit 5GHz.

 

also you're assuming every single game uses multithreading, and that SMT really isn't working correctly, lets wait a few months and then we'll see if it's AMD just saying things.

 

also, games now are often coded to make better use of intel cpus, and it takes a while, if they ever do, for people to start making games for other cpus

(unless they're paid to specifically make it work better on that one line of cpus)... think about what happened with Mantle...

 

DCS doesn't even use multithreading so SMT doesn't do anything...

[SkateZilla]

and don't forget the fact that the 7700K can easily hit 5GHz.

 

also you're assuming every single game uses multithreading, and that SMT really isn't working correctly, lets wait a few months and then we'll see if it's AMD just saying things.

 

also, games now are often coded to make better use of intel cpus, and it takes a while, if they ever do, for people to start making games for other cpus

(unless they're paid to specifically make it work better on that one line of cpus)... think about what happened with Mantle...

 

DCS doesn't even use multithreading so SMT doesn't do anything...

 

Turning SMT off on AMD Ryzen Mainboards Gives a 10%+ Boost in Avg FPS in games.

[Pilotasso]

There is a known thread scheduling problem with ryzen that stems for lack of windows proper support. We should see performance in single thread go up a notch when that is fixed. The current 20% disadvantage in gaming to the 7700k should narrow down (although predictably not eliminated).

[SkateZilla]

Just a Heads up, he does say the S word alot.

 

[Hadwell]

hes comparing the FX 8350 to a non overclocked 2500k... and any benchmark where the fps is = with two different cpus is GPU bottlenecked, so what you're seeing is the graphics cards benchmark, not the processors... no two cpus are the exact same, even comparing two 1800Xs the fps difference will be slightly different if you're seeing the processors limit, and not the graphics card.

 

i wish they'd show the benchmarks for a 7700K@5Ghz instead of stock...

 

also that battlefield benchmark they don't show the cpu frequency, and the gpu is running at 2050mhz on the 1800X and 2038 on the 7700K, plus the 7700ks gpu is using 110mb more memory, so is probably at higher graphics settings... and has 2ms less latency...

Edited March 7, 2017 by Hadwell

[BitMaster]

I tried some stupid stuff yesterday night with a friend :)

 

DCS runs without a glitch till 5.2GHZ and 4133MHz RAM....that's a fact.

 

Prime95...rather not...fails in less than 2 seconds on ALL cores haha at that speed for now.

 

It passes all light benchmarkings and plays...... 3043 IPC LoL I couldnt top the 3077 !! damn thing BSOD'ed at 5275MHz....sucker

 

 

 

 

I think I heard the clocks for 4c AMD has leaked...gotta look for that. I really think AMD knows exactly what they have to deliver to play with the big dogs...and they will I am very sure.

 

Just this 7700k is a hard nut to crack... This CPU is getting sweeter and sweeter.

 

Still, if I had to build a WS now it would be Ryzen based.

[Andrei]

After some headbanging, analyzing in Excel and reading s*loads of reviews i've finally made the decision to go for 7700K :) Especially now that one of the shops has a pretty sweet deal on those.

[Hiromachi]

Not sure about leak of 4 core model, but here is when whole one CCX gots turned off and cpu behaves basically like 4c/8t one - http://www.zolkorn.com/news/report-an-error-for-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-core-i7-7700k-mhz-by-mhz/

 

It's 4 Ghz to 4 Ghz so more clock to clock situation than real one, as anyone who can, pushes 7700k as far as it goes. Or as far as its possible without a delid. But it shows that AMD did not lie and its about the IPC of Broadwell. The only lack here are clocks, since Ryzen cant go that far. But then again, it has twice as many cores so it might be a different story in games that actually utilize more cores.

[OldE24]

get what you like. people comparing it to a 7700k are stupid just becuase it's in the price range...it should be compared to the 6900K that is 1000$....THAT DOESNT have the single thread of a 7700k.....but for some reason the keep going back to 7700.

[SkateZilla]

The 7700K is a Fantastic Processor for Gaming if you Already have the Platform

(Mainboard, Ram, Cooler, etc etc).

 

If You do workstation, rendering, multi-media, etc etc, on top of gaming.

 

For the Price point of the 1700 and 1800 Ryzen 7s, there's no reason to Ignore them at all,

Even more so if you are building a new rig from scratch.

 

The Main Issue right now is all the Very Good high End Boards are Back Ordered.

 

And I would not recommend dropping a 8c/16t CPU into a 5+2 VRM Budget Board.

[Hiromachi]

Depends what you call budget. There are cheap boards or rather cheaper than X370 and you can OC on them about as good as top ones.

If you take a look here: http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442052797a656e203720313730302045696768742d436f72652050726f636573736f72

There are number of guys who reach as high scores in their B350 Asus Prime or MSI Tomahawk as those in X370 high end motherboards. I'm personally going for Asrock Taichi as I expect it to last for a while and probably will get into improved Ryzen chips in the future. But still, a decent motherboard and R7 1700 give you so much room and are versatile for such a low price.

[SkateZilla]

Depends what you call budget. There are cheap boards or rather cheaper than X370 and you can OC on them about as good as top ones.

If you take a look here: http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442052797a656e203720313730302045696768742d436f72652050726f636573736f72

There are number of guys who reach as high scores in their B350 Asus Prime or MSI Tomahawk as those in X370 high end motherboards. I'm personally going for Asrock Taichi as I expect it to last for a while and probably will get into improved Ryzen chips in the future. But still, a decent motherboard and R7 1700 give you so much room and are versatile for such a low price.

 

When I Say Budget, I dont mean Chipset, I mean board components.

 

The VRM Array Specifically, and the Quality of the Components used in the entire Power System on the Board, from the Mosfets, caps to the Voltage control chip.

[BitMaster]

I would also not go with the lowest of the lowest boards just to cut some corners/money.

 

The thing is, a it always comes as a two edged sword in real life, those boards with 12k caps and everything premium also have tons of stuff embedded that at least gave me lots of headache. Too many chips and functions cause their own problems and as those two chipsets in question, Z270 and X370, are BOTH fairly new and buggy...it's bound to brick if you overdo it.

There are several people over at hardocp with bricked Asus Apex's....I think I did the right thing this time and went with a sleeker board that still has 10 VRMs and decent caps.

 

12k caps are hard to get, afair I only saw them on WS boards and TUF boards.

 

 

I for example check Asus DL-site daily as my system boots fine...it just takes about two minutes to bypass post.

 

Both rivals are brand new and still suffer from unripe Bios' and all sorts of childhood illnesses. As usual I'd say when new chipsets and CPUs arrive.

[BitMaster]

Hardocp tested the 1700 vs the "X" models.

 

Less than 100MHz difference top clock.

 

So I think my guess is still valid, this plain 1700 is Intel's neckbreaker in 2017.

 

3.95 GHz 8c/16t for 330$

[gavagai]

Hardocp tested the 1700 vs the "X" models.

 

Less than 100MHz difference top clock.

 

So I think my guess is still valid, this plain 1700 is Intel's neckbreaker in 2017.

 

3.95 GHz 8c/16t for 330$

 

So far I haven't seen intel prices drop 1 penny.

[BeastyBaiter]

Same. WCC reported it but that's based on microcenter pricing alone, which was always discounted apparently(I didn't know till this came up).

[Hiromachi]

WCC report is based on a single accident. I doubt there will be any immediate price drop since at this point there is no great danger to Intel with only R7s. R5 and R3 which offer plenty for a better price can mess in lower price ranges though. They make 7350k i3 obsolete when for the same price of 2c/4t one can get 4c/8t.

But still Intel is more likely to fire 10,000 people (just like they have fired 12,000 last year) than cut prices.

[BitMaster]

Ignorance doesnt pay, Intel will learn too, maybe the harsh way

[SkateZilla]

i believe intel said a few days before launch that price cuts were coming.

 

then the reviews showed ryzen didnt compete in 1080p gaming, so they prolly said nevermind.

 

 

the issue is, Ryzen Competes in 4K Gaming, and Everything else.

 

So Anyone wanting a Completely New 8x16t system would save $500+ and go AMD.

[Nash]

i believe intel said a few days before launch that price cuts were coming.

 

then the reviews showed ryzen didnt compete in 1080p gaming, so they prolly said nevermind.

 

 

the issue is, Ryzen Competes in 4K Gaming, and Everything else.

 

So Anyone wanting a Completely New 8x16t system would save $500+ and go AMD.

Ryzen_7_is_actually_behaving_like_a_dual_4c8t