• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

*** AMD "Zen" thread (inc AM4/APU discussion) ***

Tbh even tho I don't care that much about Ryzen for myself, I'm still long on AMD. They're undervalued atm, and I'm looking to ride this wave until 20-30 easily. After that, eh, who knows, but definitely up to that. Don't be fooled by momentary blips! ;)
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
OFC they clammed up - this should have been conveyed to the reviewers in the reviewer guide.

The fix is for AMD to have told reviewers to test games with both SMT enabled and disabled. There is NOTHING complex about putting that in their reviewers guides.

The fix would be for AMD to be honest and say MS was having some delays in getting drivers and scheduler updates out. The fix would be them saying games needed updates to handle the AMD implementation of SMT.

They need to be honest about these problems - not hide them and this should have been said before reviews were out.

They know very well hiding problems has blown up in their face and they don't have the sway of Intel or Nvidia to bury them.

It shows you either AMD has not done proper internal testing or has and was trying to hide it to save face.

Saving face is irrelevant when your CPU is scoring upto 15% lower scores in games due to SMT issues.

But the problem is like hiding a dirty family secret its different when you get on top of it,instead of somebody "finding it out".

It looks like review sites have found a "bug" in Ryzen regarding SMT and gaming and many sites are not aware of the SMT issues in games,so are showing lower than normal performance in games.

OTH,if they actually see the tree for the woods,and get ahead of the curve on it they could manage it. Plus so many people pre-ordered Ryzen for gaming,expecting it would reasonably competitive even if it did not beat Intel,but the issue is in certain reviews(who seem to be oblivious to the issue),they tested with SMT on meaning performance could regress to IB levels in certain reviews.

IB levels at the worst end are still perfectly fine but,the issue it sounds like AMD Ryzen is more like a 5 to 6 year old than a newer one and people will subconsciously link the two.

We are enthusiasts,so we can kind of think its plausible for AMD to get another 10% maybe 15% out of the CPU once devs start getting to grips with optimisation,or by simply switching off SMT.

But since most reviewers won't know this so will most people looking at the Ryzen reviews who won't be on forums like here.
Click to expand...

Something doesn't smell right here. No one was going more than you prior to launch and now you've gone all Debbie Downer on AMD.

Some criticism is fair but really it's a brand new architecture, brand new motherboards, just switched over to DDR4, a massive come back against a tech industry giant and a few benchmarks at 1080p using a £500 CPU aren't as fast as a 4c4t Intel CPU. Is that really fair?

Check out modern games at 1440p plus, resolutions we all use. No real difference and you get a massive gain in none gaming workloads for half the price of an Intel equivalent. To me that's a huge success, with decent thermals and power consumption too...
 
harney said:
Was about to post :)

I know a few peeps here do not like this guy but it seems he is giving good info here

thx for this
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I do find it interesting that the results differ from most of the main stream sites, I also don't buy that Intel has given backhanders for reviews.
 
Troezar said:
Something doesn't smell right here. No one was going more than you prior to launch and now you've gone all Debbie Downer on AMD.

Some criticism is fair but really it's a brand new architecture, brand new motherboards, just switched over to DDR4, a massive come back against a tech industry giant and a few benchmarks at 1080p using a £500 CPU aren't as fast as a 4c4t Intel CPU. Is that really fair?

Check out modern games at 1440p plus, resolutions we all use. No real difference and you get a massive gain in none gaming workloads for half the price of an Intel equivalent. To me that's a huge success, with decent thermals and power consumption too...
Click to expand...

?? Because its getting irritating that literally every AMD launch has some problem like this - we are on an enthusiast forum so we will give it leeway.

But most people won't??

R9 290X,Fury X,RX480,etc. All reasonably solid but let done by some problem at launch which means Nvidia comes in gets some nice sales.

How can you excuse AMD hiding an SMT bug in games which reduces performance by upto 15% ??

On Hexus they mentioned SMT performance drops in all games.

How many of those review sites out there even knew about the issue?

So loads of people will be reading reviews where SMT has dropped performance without knowing it.

Its why I am annoyed - AMD is underselling their own product and I want AMD to do well and I can't understand what they achieved from hiding the issue.

In the end Intel and Nvidia take advantage of this and ignore AMD.
 
Asus hero, asrock Taichi.

Single sided dimms. 2x2 configuration. Hynix Ic or Samsung working around 3000-3200 consistently on 140 or so clock. 4x2 not working above 2600, on most 2400 is max....
 
SiDeards73 said:
Tbh you cannot deny those CPU figures, he's running an OC'd 1080 on Ultra settings on a 144hz 1080p screen with Vsync off
Click to expand...

This is what I am finding so interesting, as its different from the majority of reviews currently online.

I guess the only one we are waiting for now a JayzTwoCents.
 
Poneros said:
Tbh even tho I don't care that much about Ryzen for myself, I'm still long on AMD. They're undervalued atm, and I'm looking to ride this wave until 20-30 easily. After that, eh, who knows, but definitely up to that. Don't be fooled by momentary blips! ;)
Click to expand...

I sadly saw the drop today, and had a little panic. Sold off to late, and bought more at what I thought was the end of the dip; it wasn't.
Lost a good bit, and it stings. Overall still in the green and sticking with AMD.

They showed their CPUs can compete on performance and use less power, and less cost in enterprise level work. Should do them well later to gain more market share. They just need to sort out the gaming performance.

NVIDIA also down another 1% as well. Now at -3.56%
 
Last edited:
Jayztwocents lol. Oh dear...

For me 7600K 5G is beating 4G ryzen in gaming. Oc on ryzen currently 24-7 not going to go past 4.1 without binning.

For efficiency ryzen 2400 mems to 3000 mems is like 150-200mhz cpu speed depending on app. AMD should have realised this and gone super efficient.
 
@8 Pack
8 Pack said:
Asus hero, asrock Taichi.

Single sided dimms. 2x2 configuration. Hynix Ic or Samsung working around 3000-3200 consistently on 140 or so clock. 4x2 not working above 2600, on most 2400 is max....
Click to expand...

Is that your recommendation.
Can I ask have you or someone else ( I know your not so interested in AMD) tried higher memory and tightened down?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom