AMD To Attack Performance Desktop Market With RYZEN

[phoenix]

Boom AMD hits Intel with hard right punch ,it feels like its been a while since they made these types of substantial waves waiting for some decent benchmarks to start flowing in, i'm relatively excited about what this is going to cause in the long run.

Price war and dirty tricks from Intel, I would imagine. Pity this cannot be considered anti-competitive behaviour worthy of a good suing.

I'm more interested in seeing what the A-series, R3, and R5 chips can do when they eventually come out.

 

[KingKrush]

Price war and dirty tricks from Intel, I would imagine. Pity this cannot be considered anti-competitive behaviour worthy of a good suing.

I'm more interested in seeing what the A-series, R3, and R5 chips can do when they eventually come out.

They dropped the R from the names. Just 3 series and 5 series now. Most gamers will probably be looking at the 5 series, so we still have to wait a while for more AMD announcements. Even the cheapest 7 1700 costs i7 money. Not to mention Vega needs announcing too.

So we still need loads more info and product announcements. All the 7 series does for most people is instill a great deal of hope.

 

[phoenix]

They dropped the R from the names. Just 3 series and 5 series now. Most gamers will probably be looking at the 5 series, so we still have to wait a while for more AMD announcements. Even the cheapest 7 1700 costs i7 money. Not to mention Vega needs announcing too.

So we still need loads more info and product announcements. All the 7 series does for most people is instill a great deal of hope.

Thanks for the update.

True - and independent benchmarking results for the 7 series have not even been released. Still an embargo on those.
Motherboard-wise what would you pick if you were getting a Ryzen CPU? I'd be likely to pick a B350. Don't need all of the bells and whistles.

 

[KingKrush]

Thanks for the update.

True - and independent benchmarking results for the 7 series have not even been released. Still an embargo on those.
Motherboard-wise what would you pick if you were getting a Ryzen CPU? I'd be likely to pick a B350. Don't need all of the bells and whistles.

Almost certainly B350 too. Don't intend to overclock and I'll probably go AMD with my next graphics cards, and B350 supports Crossfire. It doesn't support SLI if you weren't aware.

 

[phoenix]

SLI/CrossFire compatibility have never been an issue for me. One graphics card is pricey enough!

 

[Glordit]

Almost certainly B350 too. Don't intend to overclock and I'll probably go AMD with my next graphics cards, and B350 supports Crossfire. It doesn't support SLI if you weren't aware.

You could actually OC on a B350 board, well at the least you could bump up the RAM speeds if your sticks are fast enough. Seen some overclocker's stating 3200Mhz is not the limit.

SLI support needs to be paid for. Otherwise Nvidia won't allow it to be used. Additionally it won't work on 16x/4x ports, it needs at minimum 8x/8x. SLI/X-Fire is finiky at best, specially with newer titles. It takes a while for drivers to release that can give you a stanble FPS as well as little to no crashing, or acutal SLI/X-Fire support. You are better of spending the money you would have used for multiple cards on a singular one.

 

[KingKrush]

You could actually OC on a B350 board, well at the least you could bump up the RAM speeds if your sticks are fast enough. Seen some overclocker's stating 3200Mhz is not the limit.

SLI support needs to be paid for. Otherwise Nvidia won't allow it to be used. Additionally it won't work on 16x/4x ports, it needs at minimum 8x/8x. SLI/X-Fire is finiky at best, specially with newer titles. It takes a while for drivers to release that can give you a stanble FPS as well as little to no crashing, or acutal SLI/X-Fire support. You are better of spending the money you would have used for multiple cards on a singular one.

I have an HD7990, which is basically 2x HD7970. Can't recall ever having a problem with a game. Performance of modern titles like GTA V, Witcher 3, Doom and Fallout 4 (with mods) is excellent, seldom or never dipping below 60fps at 1080p with max settings (minus Nvidia specific stuff or excessive anti-aliasing).

I have read from one of the overclocking sources for the Ryzen 7 chips that the motherboard makes a massive difference for overclocking. They said they only had great success with the Asus Crosshair VI Hero. But we'll only really know such things once reviewers have had a go at the chips.

 

[Glordit]

I have read from one of the overclocking sources for the Ryzen 7 chips that the motherboard makes a massive difference for overclocking. They said they only had great success with the Asus Crosshair VI Hero. But we'll only really know such things once reviewers have had a go at the chips.

Correct, CPU overclocking relies heavily on the type of motherboards. As far as I know, the X-series will support the X-seiries CPU's "boosting" (eXtended frequency range is a mouthful so I just call it boosting) and will be able to overclock any other Ryzen CPU. Otherwise you are limited to RAM overclocking on cerain B-series, and A-series will be the basic of the basic.

I am not too concerned about Overclocking myself, I'll just stick to a non-X variant possibly a R5 1500, perhaps even a R7 but I want to see what VEGA is going to be like.

*EDIT*
Apologies I need to explain this better, since it can be confusing, and I somewhat worded my previous response badly.

• XFR can push clock speeds past the base boost speed. Automatically, which is dependant on cooling. Regardless of Motherboard.
• X-Series motherboards allow overclocking on All Ryzen CPU's, B-Series only RAM(see below) and A-series not at all.
• Overclocking on a X-series motherboard with a X-series CPU will allow you to push past the XFR frequency.
• For example: A 1800X has a base of 3.6Ghz | Boost/Turbo of 4.0Ghz | XFR will automatically take it past 4.0Ghz. Or you can manually push past the 3.6Ghz base and XFR will boost it further.
  
  
• X370/X300/B350 Chipsets will allow Overclocking. We will have to wait until the 2nd to see what Overclocking options there are on non X-series motherboards. So far it looks like B350 allows RAM overclocking, but until some one actually can check the BIOS, all I can do is guess.

In theory then at a Base clock of 4.0Ghz, XFR can take it to 4.5Ghz+

I recall, 5Ghz seems being the limit on LN2, but that's 5Ghz on eight cores. I also would like to see if Ryzen benefits more from Faster RAM speeds or lower CAS latency.

*EDIT2*
Wait for reviews on products, that way we will get the best understanding of how everything works.

 

[Glordit]

 

[phoenix]

AMD cozies up to Bethesda

http://www.pcgamer.com/bethesda-partners-with-amd-to-optimize-games-for-ryzen-and-vega/

 

[Glordit]

Lots of reviews starting to pop up:

http://www.toptengamer.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-vs-intel-i7-7700k-1800x/

TLDR: R7 1700 is tied with a 5Ghz 7700K. Ryzen is everything we wanted and more.

*EDIT*
After reading quite a few reviews the general consensus is;

R7 1700 is for gaming.
R7 1700/1800X is more for productivity.

While the R7 1700 does give around the same performance (within 10%) as a i7 7700k at 5Ghz, it is vital to note that a 7700k needs a Z-series motherboard as well as a AIO cooler to achieve 5Ghz. Also you might get a chip that will only allow 4.7Ghz. On the other hand, the 1700 just needs a B350 motherboard. Saving you quite a bit of money, specially for at maximum at 10% difference in performance.

*EDIT 2*

Just to make some clarifications, specifically with regards to bad gaming benchmarks and performance

AMD's AM4 platform is brand new and so is Ryzen. With this in mind games have been built around Intel processors for quite a while, give the technology a couple of months to be matured through BIOS and Windows updates before simply saying, it's bad.

AMD also managed to produce something from almost nothing, AMD does not have the market share and money that Intel has, and we NEED AMD to be competitive otherwise Intel will be releasing the same re-hashed chips year after year.

 

[PsychoFish]

http://www.pcgamer.com/the-amd-ryzen-7-review/

The AMD Ryzen 7: plenty of power, but underwhelming gaming performance

The issue, and I seem to get a similar thread from most of the reviews, is a problem with SMP. This is concerning, as AMD should have picked this up in testing. I'm sure that this can be fixed with a driver update for windows

 

[B1nary]

The Days of low core low thread use need to die, multi-threading needs more attention in the gaming world , i'm not sure how difficult its would be to update or create games to make better use of CPU's with more cores and threads but this really needs to be addressed, since there we no fairly priced CPU's on the market that provided this until now I suppose game dev's didn't really care that much.

 

[Glordit]

The Days of low core low thread use need to die, multi-threading needs more attention in the gaming world , i'm not sure how difficult its would be to update or create games to make better use of CPU's with more cores and threads but this really needs to be addressed, since there we no fairly priced CPU's on the market that provided this until now I suppose game dev's didn't really care that much.

This probably happened because, Intel held the market for so long.

 

[Weasley]

The Days of low core low thread use need to die, multi-threading needs more attention in the gaming world , i'm not sure how difficult its would be to update or create games to make better use of CPU's with more cores and threads but this really needs to be addressed, since there we no fairly priced CPU's on the market that provided this until now I suppose game dev's didn't really care that much.

my understanding was the control of what should be render next was not easily threaded in older Direct X versions but as far as i know AMD with mantle helped MS to fix that and that why DirictX 12/windows 10 drivers can start to handle more than one thread in the rendering engine so more than one core can work on that now.

 

[Xiphan]

I'm really grateful he included the FX 8350 in his review as that is what I currently have and the 1800X absolutely decimates it in everything! I am not disappointed in the least as this will be a massive upgrade in performance for me.

Otherwise here is the bad part of that review in case you skipped the end.

Spoiler: show

 

[Glordit]

I'm really grateful he included the FX 8350 in his review as that is what I currently have and the 1800X absolutely decimates it in everything! I am not disappointed in the least as this will be a massive upgrade in performance for me.

Otherwise here is the bad part of that review in case you skipped the end.

Spoiler: show

I saw Linus' e-mail/Tweet to ASUS about possibly getting a replacement. That's was somewhat funny, also irresponsible for using such an unsecure method.

*EDIT*
As a whole I am happy for AMD, their product is a massive jump in performance from the FX line and it's shame that developers have no pushed further than 4 cores or threads on games. It that was the Case AMD would have had the crown in gaming too.

 

[PsychoFish]

The Days of low core low thread use need to die, multi-threading needs more attention in the gaming world , i'm not sure how difficult its would be to update or create games to make better use of CPU's with more cores and threads but this really needs to be addressed, since there we no fairly priced CPU's on the market that provided this until now I suppose game dev's didn't really care that much.

Actually multi-threading can be as simple or as hard as you would like to make it. However, the problem comes down to control and therein lies the problem. If you happen to run a workload that only uses four or so heavy threads, and Windows happens to put two of the heaviest threads on the same physical core, performance will end up being lower. That is the HT/SMT conundrum. Do I use all the cores or do I just guess that the end user has 2-4 PHYSICAL cores and try and contain myself. You can let Windows decide how to load balance (which is does a fairy decent job of) or you can control it. It can become a nightmare.

 

[B1nary]

I'm really grateful he included the FX 8350 in his review as that is what I currently have and the 1800X absolutely decimates it in everything! I am not disappointed in the least as this will be a massive upgrade in performance for me.

Otherwise here is the bad part of that review in case you skipped the end.

Spoiler: show

I get the idea they are ridding this Linus drops stuff thing

 

[Xiphan]

Actually multi-threading can be as simple or as hard as you would like to make it. However, the problem comes down to control and therein lies the problem. If you happen to run a workload that only uses four or so heavy threads, and Windows happens to put two of the heaviest threads on the same physical core, performance will end up being lower. That is the HT/SMT conundrum. Do I use all the cores or do I just guess that the end user has 2-4 PHYSICAL cores and try and contain myself. You can let Windows decide how to load balance (which is does a fairy decent job of) or you can control it. It can become a nightmare.

I think by the time I actually get my new stuff all the software and BIOS issues will have been worked out by then and it will be a stable platform. View attachment 24029