-
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.
Ryzen "2" ?
- Thread starter beany_bot
- Start date
Caporegime
Yup my bad, but also comparing his 8600K to the 1600 when what we are talking about is the 2700X.
Yes indeed^^^^^
Ya, more hyperbole.....
Your 2700X @ 4.2Ghz
The best 8700K at 5.3Ghz
So for 26% higher clocks (4.2Ghz vs 5.3Ghz) the 8700K scores 6% higher.
That actually leaves me feeling far more impressed with what the 2700X achieved.
So now we are mixing up Firestrike versions and CPU's.
The fact is all being equal: "So for 26% higher clocks (4.2Ghz vs 5.3Ghz) the 8700K scores 6% higher."
Yeah, i'm not going after CPU results in a 4k benchmark you morons...
Caporegime
Ok lets have a look at something....
The Combined test is meant to be GPU + Physics
The 7820X 6 core 12 thread scores 21,200 Physics
The 8600K 6 core 6 thread scores 15,400 Physics
The 7820X combined scores 8,700
The 8600K combined scores 11,900
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15067776
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15466128
So i cannot make sense of how a CPU which score much higher in Physics should be much slower in Physics + Graphics combined?
Perhaps its more of a Synthetic 3DMark quirk than it is CPU performance, unless we are suggesting the 7820X is 35% slower than the 8600K but at the same time also 30% faster in the same workload?
Edit: right so iakhtar's 4670K is comparable in performance to an i9 7820X.....
I think the only think that we have learned here is 3DMark is a total nonsense.
The Combined test is meant to be GPU + Physics
The 7820X 6 core 12 thread scores 21,200 Physics
The 8600K 6 core 6 thread scores 15,400 Physics
The 7820X combined scores 8,700
The 8600K combined scores 11,900
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15067776
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/15466128
So i cannot make sense of how a CPU which score much higher in Physics should be much slower in Physics + Graphics combined?
Perhaps its more of a Synthetic 3DMark quirk than it is CPU performance, unless we are suggesting the 7820X is 35% slower than the 8600K but at the same time also 30% faster in the same workload?
Edit: right so iakhtar's 4670K is comparable in performance to an i9 7820X.....
I think the only think that we have learned here is 3DMark is a total nonsense.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Does that make the 7820X 35% slower? i know the latency on both Ryzen and Skylake-X makes a slight difference but Firestrike is the only thing that has a 35% performance deficit, infact the 7820X has Hyper threading which the 8600K does not so its actually more like over 50%.
No, i think this is down to Firestrike because its results are never replicated in real games, not even close.
Edit: actually the 7820X is an 8 core 16 thread... so that makes it even worse.
Last edited:
Permabanned
Hard to know whats "safe" with these CPU's.
Currently running, PE3, 103.4 bclk, -0.025 offset, LLC4.
Reaches 1.531V sometimes.
IBT AVX 10 x very high pass.
Does boost to 4497 and 4187 ish all core.
Gonna leave it running at that, if it dies it dies.
Currently running, PE3, 103.4 bclk, -0.025 offset, LLC4.
Reaches 1.531V sometimes.
IBT AVX 10 x very high pass.
Does boost to 4497 and 4187 ish all core.
Gonna leave it running at that, if it dies it dies.
Permabanned
A firestrike extreme comparison, overclocked 2700X vs overclocked 8700k("only" running at 4.9), with similar GPU clocks.
Hard to find valid comparisons given everything is overclocked to various levels.
Hard to find valid comparisons given everything is overclocked to various levels.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Aug 2017
- Posts
- 2,209
Not a lot between these is there? Well not unless you take the jacket off the 8700 and chuck oodles of power at it - even then its not going to be massively faster.
Permabanned
Yeah not a huge amount. Though if you get a decent clocking 8700k the gap will increase.
Ryzen 7 2700X is the faster CPU. Just accept (I mean the Intel trolls) that it's stupid to take a 12-thread processor over a 16-thread one.
upload jpg
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,18.html
upload jpghttp://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,18.html
Deleted member 66701
D
Deleted member 66701
So what about the 20 thread Intel beating the 32 thread 1950x then?
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Aug 2017
- Posts
- 2,209
lolAnyway prob wont be an issue when the next TR chips pop out later this year, i wouldnt be surprised if they head the table.
Permabanned
Just when you thought we might get some sensible thread input. 
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 29,933
Try to at least act like an adult on occasion. The 2700X is a great chip, and if I hadn't gotten my 8700k at a reallllly good price I'd have probably gone for one.
Soldato
The chips are great. What's rubbish is the ram situation.
I'm sat here with no ram for a week now as I have sent mine back under RMA.
BUT.... 8pack says that 3200MHz isn't even a given even with the 8 Pack ram and a 2700x.
Which I find a truly ridiculous state of affairs.
See comments 477, 478 and 479.
---
If the new sticks I receive aren't stable at 3200MHz I might regret buying the 2700x when I should have just done the full system swap to the 8700k.
I'm sat here with no ram for a week now as I have sent mine back under RMA.
BUT.... 8pack says that 3200MHz isn't even a given even with the 8 Pack ram and a 2700x.
Which I find a truly ridiculous state of affairs.
See comments 477, 478 and 479.
---
If the new sticks I receive aren't stable at 3200MHz I might regret buying the 2700x when I should have just done the full system swap to the 8700k.
I got these for my CH6 Ryzen 2700X build.
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...4000mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-098-tg.html
I knew there was zero chance of getting 4000MHz out of them, so I hoped for around 3466 with decent timings which was met. I have them running at 3466 with CL 14 timings (your mileage may vary) and I suspect as BIOS matures I can push further. I also had them running at 3600MHz with CL16 timings but they needed 1.45v to be stable and I would not be happy with that.
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...4000mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-098-tg.html
I knew there was zero chance of getting 4000MHz out of them, so I hoped for around 3466 with decent timings which was met. I have them running at 3466 with CL 14 timings (your mileage may vary) and I suspect as BIOS matures I can push further. I also had them running at 3600MHz with CL16 timings but they needed 1.45v to be stable and I would not be happy with that.
Soldato
So even tho you have sent the memory back for replacement reading those posts you have quoted it seems that the issue could be down to the individual CPU...?
When 8Pack writes....
3200 on amd imc is not a given you know.... Intel sure but some amd imc are just junk.
Soldato
On both a 1700 and a 2700x to exhibit the same freezing my guess (and hope) is it's not the IMC.
I'd have to be very very unlucky to get a 2700x to replace a 1700 to also suffer from the same issue. A crap IMC or what he said limitations in the infinity fabric.
I'm not convinced.