Ryzen IS RELEASED!!! - Page 2

General » Urban Commandos

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Ryzen IS RELEASED!!! (Page 2 of 2)

Posted: 3/1/2017 6:12:49 PM EDT

[#1]

Quote History

Quoted:
I just ordered a whole new system...

Had to pre-order the 1700x and Asus Prime x370 board, but the rest is on the way.

View Quote

What else are you putting in it? Ram, HD, power, etc

Posted: 3/1/2017 11:07:36 PM EDT

[#2]

FUCK

My 1700X has shipped but I still can't find a Gigabyte GA-AX370-GAMING 5 board to order anywhere.

Posted: 3/1/2017 11:25:11 PM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:
What else are you putting in it? Ram, HD, power, etc

View Quote

32GB of DDR4 3200, M.2 500GB solid state, 2TB hybrid for storage, Corsair 850W PSU, Corsair AIO cooler, and some other bits. I'm waiting on the video card side of things, I want to see how Vega turns out.

Posted: 3/1/2017 11:27:38 PM EDT

[#4]

Quote History

Quoted:
FUCK

My 1700X has shipped but I still can't find a Gigabyte GA-AX370-GAMING 5 board to order anywhere.

View Quote

Aye. I wanted that board as well originally until they all sold out. My backup was the ASRock Taichi but that sold out fast too, lol. I settled on the Asus Prime X370. They're all pretty similar it seems as far as features, the only thing I was really wanting was the increased power phases.

Posted: 3/2/2017 10:25:47 AM EDT

[#5]

Oh look. Ryzen isn't the brutal Intel killer that AMD was making it out to be.

After a quick look at the launch day videos, it looks like Intel has a lot to worry about with the X99 platform.

Looking at the 1800x vs i7 7700k comparisons, it looks like the R7 1700 is going to be competitive with the i7 7700k, but does not blow it away. Future programs that are more heavily multi-threaded will be interesting. Seeing R7 1700 gaming benchmarks will be interesting. I predict the i7 7700k will perform better in most current/old games. When future games are more multi-threaded optimize, I predict that we will see the R7 1700 start to match/pull ahead. If you have a Microcenter nearby, they are selling the i7 for $299.

Posted: 3/2/2017 10:50:18 AM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:
Oh look. Ryzen isn't the brutal Intel killer that AMD was making it out to be.

After a quick look at the launch day videos, it looks like Intel has a lot to worry about with the X99 platform.

Looking at the 1800x vs i7 7700k comparisons, it looks like the R7 1700 is going to be competitive with the i7 7700k, but does not blow it away. Future programs that are more heavily multi-threaded will be interesting. Seeing R7 1700 gaming benchmarks will be interesting. I predict the i7 7700k will perform better in most current/old games. When future games are more multi-threaded optimize, I predict that we will see the R7 1700 start to match/pull ahead. If you have a Microcenter nearby, they are selling the i7 for $299.

View Quote

Exactly as expected imo. Again if you do something that can take advantage of the extra cores, then good on you. But for the rest of us guys they are worthless.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951.html

Posted: 3/2/2017 11:43:51 AM EDT

[#7]

Quote History

Quoted:
Exactly as expected imo. Again if you do something that can take advantage of the extra cores, then good on you. But for the rest of us guys they are worthless.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951.html

View Quote

Meh I wouldn't say worthless. IPC and single thread performance is pretty good.

I can't wait to see what the R5 and R3 performance is like, but I can take a pretty good guess at it.

The big question is whether or not AMD can maintain this competition in the coming years.

Posted: 3/2/2017 12:06:44 PM EDT

[#8]

Quote History

Quoted:
Exactly as expected imo. Again if you do something that can take advantage of the extra cores, then good on you. But for the rest of us guys they are worthless.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951.html

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Oh look. Ryzen isn't the brutal Intel killer that AMD was making it out to be.

After a quick look at the launch day videos, it looks like Intel has a lot to worry about with the X99 platform.

Looking at the 1800x vs i7 7700k comparisons, it looks like the R7 1700 is going to be competitive with the i7 7700k, but does not blow it away. Future programs that are more heavily multi-threaded will be interesting. Seeing R7 1700 gaming benchmarks will be interesting. I predict the i7 7700k will perform better in most current/old games. When future games are more multi-threaded optimize, I predict that we will see the R7 1700 start to match/pull ahead. If you have a Microcenter nearby, they are selling the i7 for $299.

Exactly as expected imo. Again if you do something that can take advantage of the extra cores, then good on you. But for the rest of us guys they are worthless.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951.html

Yeah, I was going to say "In before the 'look at my cores' guys try to justify why their games still don't play as fast as on Intel". The only games where Ryzen isn't on the bottom are the ones where CPU just isn't an issue, and they're all tied. To be fair, for the ~0.2% of home users that will actually fill all 8 cores because they do video editing and their encoder and codec are well multi-threaded, yeah, Ryzen will be cool.

I like the idea of AMD. I've spent a LOT of money on AMD stuff (Athlon XP, Athlon MP, many Athlon 64s, 1/2/4/8-way Opterons, etc.). Other than one single creative burst 10+ years back, though, they've never been able to actually pull anything off. Lower performance, buggier, flakier chipsets. The only thing they can do well is make "cheap" cheap.

$350 Intel chip beating AMD's $500 chip.... my, how tables have turned.

Posted: 3/2/2017 1:52:48 PM EDT

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:

Yeah, I was going to say "In before the 'look at my cores' guys try to justify why their games still don't play as fast as on Intel". The only games where Ryzen isn't on the bottom are the ones where CPU just isn't an issue, and they're all tied. To be fair, for the ~0.2% of home users that will actually fill all 8 cores because they do video editing and their encoder and codec are well multi-threaded, yeah, Ryzen will be cool.

I like the idea of AMD. I've spent a LOT of money on AMD stuff (Athlon XP, Athlon MP, many Athlon 64s, 1/2/4/8-way Opterons, etc.). Other than one single creative burst 10+ years back, though, they've never been able to actually pull anything off. Lower performance, buggier, flakier chipsets. The only thing they can do well is make "cheap" cheap.

$350 Intel chip beating AMD's $500 chip.... my, how tables have turned.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Oh look. Ryzen isn't the brutal Intel killer that AMD was making it out to be.

After a quick look at the launch day videos, it looks like Intel has a lot to worry about with the X99 platform.

Looking at the 1800x vs i7 7700k comparisons, it looks like the R7 1700 is going to be competitive with the i7 7700k, but does not blow it away. Future programs that are more heavily multi-threaded will be interesting. Seeing R7 1700 gaming benchmarks will be interesting. I predict the i7 7700k will perform better in most current/old games. When future games are more multi-threaded optimize, I predict that we will see the R7 1700 start to match/pull ahead. If you have a Microcenter nearby, they are selling the i7 for $299.

Exactly as expected imo. Again if you do something that can take advantage of the extra cores, then good on you. But for the rest of us guys they are worthless.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951.html

Yeah, I was going to say "In before the 'look at my cores' guys try to justify why their games still don't play as fast as on Intel". The only games where Ryzen isn't on the bottom are the ones where CPU just isn't an issue, and they're all tied. To be fair, for the ~0.2% of home users that will actually fill all 8 cores because they do video editing and their encoder and codec are well multi-threaded, yeah, Ryzen will be cool.

I like the idea of AMD. I've spent a LOT of money on AMD stuff (Athlon XP, Athlon MP, many Athlon 64s, 1/2/4/8-way Opterons, etc.). Other than one single creative burst 10+ years back, though, they've never been able to actually pull anything off. Lower performance, buggier, flakier chipsets. The only thing they can do well is make "cheap" cheap.

$350 Intel chip beating AMD's $500 chip.... my, how tables have turned.

yup

Posted: 3/2/2017 1:58:47 PM EDT

[#10]

When will the Ryzen 5 and 3 series be released?

Posted: 3/2/2017 3:23:06 PM EDT

[#11]

Quote History

Quoted:
When will the Ryzen 5 and 3 series be released?

View Quote

Q2

Posted: 3/2/2017 3:55:05 PM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:

...
10 is superior to 8 in every single conceivable way.

View Quote

... unless you don't want your machine to reboot whenever the hell it wants with whatever updates it wants.

... but this is a Ryzen thread. Lets keep non-Ryzen bitches somewhere else.

Posted: 3/2/2017 4:09:30 PM EDT

[#13]

I would enjoy trying to use up all those cores, but I haven't noticed a board that will take enough memory to work as a VM host yet. They all seem to be 4 slots, 64G max (32G max affordable

)

Posted: 3/2/2017 6:41:16 PM EDT

[#14]

A lot of reviews are making single threads a big deal when comparing Intel and AMD. Intel have a better single thread while AMD have better multiple threads performance. Single threads performance is pretty much going away. The only left over is gaming and that already changing. It like 5 years ago when everybody thinks all you need was a dual core. There was no need to get quad core for gaming. Well I got quad core 5 years ago and it still good today. The dual core is no more and a lot of people end up replacing it with quad core.

The 1800x is probably the best deal in the long run. Buying it now will last you for at least 8 years. With this CPU the only think you need to replace is the graphic card.

I am waiting to see how Ryzen will preform with Win7 before pulling the trigger. If there no major problem I'll get the 1800X with at least 32gb of ram and a top end ASROCK MB. That's basically all I need to upgrade my computer. I might get a 8bay icy dock for my SSD. I'm currently running 9 drives (3 HDD and 6 SSD) on my computer.

https://www.amazon.com/DOCK-Metal-HotSwap-Backplane-Drive/dp/B00TL4US8K?tag=vglnk-c102-20

Posted: 3/2/2017 6:57:18 PM EDT

[#15]

Quote History

Quoted:
A lot of reviews are making single threads a big deal when comparing Intel and AMD. Intel have a better single thread while AMD have better multiple threads performance. Single threads performance is pretty much going away. The only left over is gaming and that already changing. It like 5 years ago when everybody thinks all you need was a dual core. There was no need to get quad core for gaming. Well I got quad core 5 years ago and it still good today. The dual core is no more and a lot of people end up replacing it with quad core.

The 1800x is probably the best deal in the long run. Buying it now will last you for at least 8 years. With this CPU the only think you need to replace is the graphic card.

I am waiting to see how Ryzen will preform with Win7 before pulling the trigger. If there no major problem I'll get the 1800X with at least 32gb of ram and a top end ASROCK MB. That's basically all I need to upgrade my computer. I might get a 8bay icy dock for my SSD. I'm currently running 9 drives (3 HDD and 6 SSD) on my computer.

https://www.amazon.com/DOCK-Metal-HotSwap-Backplane-Drive/dp/B00TL4US8K?tag=vglnk-c102-20

View Quote

If you need multi core performance, you would already know all of that.

I don't have hard statistics, but I would bet that the vast majority of people watching those YouTube reviews are gamers.

Posted: 3/2/2017 8:21:08 PM EDT

[#16]

For the market segment that AMD is targeting with the R7 lineup, those chips are exactly where they need to be. The 1800x is very comparable to the 6900k performance wise while being half the cost of the comparable Intel offering.

Those that are trying to compare the 1800x to the 7700k are missing the point. In most of the same game benches that the 1800x loses to the 7700k, the 6900k loses to the 7700k as well. Is the 6900k and x99 boards junk because they lose to a 7700k in a game? No, that claim can't be made and it doesn't apply to the 1800x either. The R7s aren't the "gaming" cpu lineup from AMD, they're 8 core/16 thread CPUs geared towards workstations and lots of multi-threaded tasks. The R3 and R5 lineup will be the 4 and 6 core parts. The closest equivalent from AMD to the 7700k will be the R5 1400x (which will be $150 cheaper and use 26W less power).

As far as performance numbers go they look like they're all over the place depending on the tester and what brand of board they used. From what I understand the board makers haven't had much time to iron out and optimize things for the x370 boards, so I'd expect some improvements there. I know some will claim that it's just an excuse for performance issues, but the fact remains that implementing and ironing out all the issues with new platforms and chipsets takes time regardless of what brand makes the hardware.

Posted: 3/2/2017 8:51:02 PM EDT

[#17]

So far this is what I have seen,

If your a hard core gamer, except on VR, go with Intel 7700k and over clock the crap out of it.

Intel 7700k spanks Ryzen on games by a decent amount.

Ryzen for everything else, good enough for games and great for everything else.

Ryzen beats or matches Intel high end desktop cpu's on productivity apps at a substantial price savings.

R7 1700 is the best bang for the buck for Ryzen if you overclock since all the three released 8 cores seem to max out at about 4 GHz.

Ryzen will make Intel lower the prices on some cpu's.

Looks like EVERYBODY IS A WINNER!!!

Posted: 3/2/2017 9:13:51 PM EDT

[#18]

There's speculation going around right now that the XFR of the 1700x and 1800x is causing problems.

Ryzen 1700 vs i7 7700K | An Unbiased Look at Benchmarks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXVIPo_qbc4

This is of a 1700 (non x) OC'd to 3.9GHz compared to an OC'd 7700k at 5GHz. You would think that the numbers from the 1700 should be similar to the numbers from the 1800x but the opposite is happening here.

Something is fishy, and it smells like software that hasn't been fully optimized yet.

Posted: 3/2/2017 9:42:31 PM EDT

[#19]

The board was in stock again today and its shipped! Should be set by next week!

Posted: 3/2/2017 10:25:10 PM EDT

[#20]

Quote History

Quoted:
Ryzen for everything else, good enough for games and great for everything else.

Ryzen beats or matches Intel high end desktop cpu's on productivity apps at a substantial price savings.

View Quote

I wouldn't say that either.

I think the segments where the R3 and R5 will compete are much larger than the R7 and Intel's X99 platform. That's where performance differences are going to matter more.

Posted: 3/2/2017 10:39:35 PM EDT

[#21]

Quote History

Quoted:
There's speculation going around right now that the XFR of the 1700x and 1800x is causing problems.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXVIPo_qbc4

This is of a 1700 (non x) OC'd to 3.9GHz compared to an OC'd 7700k at 5GHz. You would think that the numbers from the 1700 should be similar to the numbers from the 1800x but the opposite is happening here.

Something is fishy, and it smells like software that hasn't been fully optimized yet.

View Quote

There are a LOT of stuff not optimized, motherboard bio's, software and even the cpu microcodes's are not.

I'll wait a few months, I'll probably wait until the R5 and R3's are released before things are settled enough for me.

Posted: 3/2/2017 10:50:31 PM EDT

[#22]

Quote History

Quoted:

I wouldn't say that either.

I think the segments where the R3 and R5 will compete are much larger than the R7 and Intel's X99 platform. That's where performance differences are going to matter more.

View Quote

I agree on the R3 and R5 segments being much larger, but I wouldn't discount the R7's "democratizing" (via price) of the previously limited X99 market. The barriers to entry are now comparatively trivial and there will be large growth.

Posted: 3/2/2017 11:26:05 PM EDT

[#23]

Quote History

Quoted:
A lot of reviews are making single threads a big deal when comparing Intel and AMD. Intel have a better single thread while AMD have better multiple threads performance. Single threads performance is pretty much going away.

View Quote

Yeah, the funny thing about that... people have been saying that for 20+ years. multi-core, multi-socket, NUMA architectures with core counts that would make home users jealous today have been around longer than most people realize, they only became aware of them once AMD brought the techs to commodity hardware. I've heard the drum you're beating for two decades, and some things just don't parallelize well. I've actually seen diminishing returns in that area over the past ten years, so I'm not holding my breath.

But hey, if big gains are made, great... Intel will loosen up and throw more cores on, too, and we'll all win.

Posted: 3/2/2017 11:27:35 PM EDT

[#24]

Quote History

Quoted:

If you need multi core performance, you would already know all of that.

I don't have hard statistics, but I would bet that the vast majority of people watching those YouTube reviews are gamers.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
A lot of reviews are making single threads a big deal when comparing Intel and AMD. Intel have a better single thread while AMD have better multiple threads performance. Single threads performance is pretty much going away. The only left over is gaming and that already changing. It like 5 years ago when everybody thinks all you need was a dual core. There was no need to get quad core for gaming. Well I got quad core 5 years ago and it still good today. The dual core is no more and a lot of people end up replacing it with quad core.

The 1800x is probably the best deal in the long run. Buying it now will last you for at least 8 years. With this CPU the only think you need to replace is the graphic card.

I am waiting to see how Ryzen will preform with Win7 before pulling the trigger. If there no major problem I'll get the 1800X with at least 32gb of ram and a top end ASROCK MB. That's basically all I need to upgrade my computer. I might get a 8bay icy dock for my SSD. I'm currently running 9 drives (3 HDD and 6 SSD) on my computer.

https://www.amazon.com/DOCK-Metal-HotSwap-Backplane-Drive/dp/B00TL4US8K?tag=vglnk-c102-20

If you need multi core performance, you would already know all of that.

I don't have hard statistics, but I would bet that the vast majority of people watching those YouTube reviews are gamers.

In the home market, virtually everyone who actually needs the fastest CPUs are gamers or video editors, and gamers are the majority. Most everyone else wouldn't really notice much seat-of-the-pants difference between a similarly-equipped 7th gen i7 and a 3rd gen i5.

Posted: 3/5/2017 7:06:24 PM EDT

[#25]

After a few days of reviews, there is clearly more optimizations required. It also appears that the 1700 is *the* R7 CPU to get.

At stock, the three processors show marginal performance differences.

When overclocked, all three seem to max out in the 3.8-4.0. The 1700 overclocked then comes pretty much even with the 1800x. The 1800x can't be pushed beyond stock. These things are taking alot of voltage to get close to 4.0Ghz.