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

[mattyc1977]

Coming from 3770k 4.7ghz I found that day to day stuff is the same, games are slightly slower, video encoding is miles faster, although boot time seems to be slower.

Is it a fresh install of windows? UEFI Ultra fast boot setting? Did you install the AMD chipset driver?

Yes fresh install of Windows, amd drivers installed and the the same Samsung Evo 850 ssd. It's not dramatically slower but I certain things just don't feel as slick. Pretty sure I have fast booting enabled, not sure it's ultra fast though? It's a Asus crosshair 6 hero motherboard.

 

[Curlyriff]

We have got a few of these running at work now. They do indeed seem to boot slower generally but have to say we haven't noticed any slow down in opening of programs or browsers or anything.

 

[steve258]

I think boot time will improve eventually with windows/uefi updates.

 

[DragonQ]

My PC takes 25 seconds to POST let alone boot, quit complaining!

 

[jigger]

ASRock have a ITX board based on the 350 chipset coming in April.

 

[harney]

Yes fresh install of Windows, amd drivers installed and the the same Samsung Evo 850 ssd. It's not dramatically slower but I certain things just don't feel as slick. Pretty sure I have fast booting enabled, not sure it's ultra fast though? It's a Asus crosshair 6 hero motherboard.

For me yes there are differences
done a few builds with Ryzens now ....Rendering , video encoding , video editing ,audio production far faster than these i7 7700k 4770k & 4790k

audio production is a mixed bag yes can do more tracks more effects then the above cpu's but at a cost of having higher ASIO audio buffer but its getting better with each bios update so i am hoping things still have to settle down ...

one thing i am seeing higher on the Ryzen platform is the DPC

i74790k / 4770k running on a gigabyte z97 ud5h gets 30 / 50 DPC

i7 7700k On ASUS Maximus VIII Extreme 20 / 40 DPC

both of the above boards are great for low DPC

But Ryzen platform is all over the place

1700 msi B350 tomahawk 155 / 250

1700 Asus b350 prime 140 / 320.. not been able to test more with this board as its been a real pain with with random not posting and black screening in windows

1700x Asus x370 Prime 160 /280

opening programs about the same and for games too above 4k / 1440p but slower at 1080p

However boot times are a tad longer but this has improved with newer bios ..and browsing seems to be slower and i see this more in my gmail hot mail ect all-most like lag at time's i have tried firefox chrome and IE all show the same results

 

[opethdisciple]

For me yes there are differences
done a few builds with Ryzens now ....Rendering , video encoding , video editing ,audio production far faster than these i7 7700k 4770k & 4790k

audio production is a mixed bag yes can do more tracks more effects then the above cpu's but at a cost of having higher ASIO audio buffer but its getting better with each bios update so i am hoping things still have to settle down ...

one thing i am seeing higher on the Ryzen platform is the DPC

i74790k / 4770k running on a gigabyte z97 ud5h gets 30 / 50 DPC

i7 7700k On ASUS Maximus VIII Extreme 20 / 40 DPC

both of the above boards are great for low DPC

But Ryzen platform is all over the place

1700 msi B350 tomahawk 155 / 250

1700 Asus b350 prime 140 / 320.. not been able to test more with this board as its been a real pain with with random not posting and black screening in windows

1700x Asus x370 Prime 160 /280

opening programs about the same and for games too above 4k / 1440p but slower at 1080p

However boot times are a tad longer but this has improved with newer bios ..and browsing seems to be slower and i see this more in my gmail hot mail ect all-most like lag at time's i have tried firefox chrome and IE all show the same results

This is not good reading!

Benchmarks as well are all over the place some have it faster most slower than the Intels. How can there be any differences between sites!

This review for example makes the 1800X look great for gaming.

In some of these benchmarks, overclocking hurts performance.

Are you running any overclocks?

 

[harney]

This is not good reading!

Benchmarks as well are all over the place some have it faster most slower than the Intels. How can there be any differences between sites!

This review for example makes the 1800X look great for gaming.

In some of these benchmarks, overclocking hurts performance.

Are you running any overclocks?

Things will settle with Ryzen with it being a new chipset and architecture as with each bios update things do improve

Yes tested at stock ,overclocked (this of course does give better results but the DPC still remains the same) ,smt disabled ,win 7 win 10
However the platform where i get better results from is in Linux... problem with that most of the audio programs / plug-ins i use are M$ based

Its on going testing for me and others too with Ryzen and i suspect things will improve over time but the question is how long ...

 

[Panos]

Since my Ryzen is send back due to the Asus board issues, and tweaking the "downgrade" I've got for the time being, I have to say this.

Anyone who says 7700K/6700K @ 4.7-5Ghz rules, doesn't have a clue what he is talking about.
Many current games, are pushing the 6800K @ 4.4Ghz across all cores, while others are running far better, even if the CPU isn't utilised fully.
The Division alone saw my fps jumping from avg 56 to 86!!! Same graphic card same settings same ram and speeds/timings. Only difference the replacement of the 6700K @ 4.7 with a 6800K @ 4.4! When the game loads his 99% on the CPU across all cores also, loading much much faster. (as did with the Ryzen 1700X at stock speeds but the perf was less due to ram speed wasn't working higher than 2133).

Same applies to TW Warhammer got fps jump on DX11 on campaign map and on battles, and even so did WOT. Which is a dual thread game, and reported that also last week with the Ryzen CPU. Reason is the game runs on core 4-5+ on both systems, and not on core 2 on the quad core, which is usually cramped with services running on it.

Also the above games had played them with the IB-E 4930K @ 4.5Ghz but the performance was worst than the 6700K @ 4.7. Possibly due to weaker IPC and DDR3 2400mhz C18 memory.
These are my observations, having passed from my hands 3 systems since last week.

 

[humbug]

Since my Ryzen is send back due to the Asus board issues, and tweaking the "downgrade" I've got for the time being, I have to say this.

Anyone who says 7700K/6700K @ 4.7-5Ghz rules, doesn't have a clue what he is talking about.
Many current games, are pushing the 6800K @ 4.4Ghz across all cores, while others are running far better, even if the CPU isn't utilised fully.
The Division alone saw my fps jumping from avg 56 to 86!!! Same graphic card same settings same ram and speeds/timings. Only difference the replacement of the 6700K @ 4.7 with a 6800K @ 4.4! When the game loads his 99% on the CPU across all cores also, loading much much faster. (as did with the Ryzen 1700X at stock speeds but the perf was less due to ram speed wasn't working higher than 2133).

Same applies to TW Warhammer got fps jump on DX11 on campaign map and on battles, and even so did WOT. Which is a dual thread game, and reported that also last week with the Ryzen CPU. Reason is the game runs on core 4-5+ on both systems, and not on core 2 on the quad core, which is usually cramped with services running on it.

Also the above games had played them with the IB-E 4930K @ 4.5Ghz but the performance was worst than the 6700K @ 4.7. Possibly due to weaker IPC and DDR3 2400mhz C18 memory.

I wouldn't recommend Intel 4 core chips at the same or higher cost than Ryzen 8 or 6 chips even if the Intel is clocked higher, the Intel may have the edge in older games but it will lose out to higher core count chips in the near future.

 

[Panos]

I wouldn't recommend Intel 4 core chips at the same or higher cost than Ryzen 8 or 6 chips even if the Intel is clocked higher, the Intel may have the edge in older games but it will lose out to higher core count chips in the near future.

Yeah I totally agree on this. But isn't the future. Is right now. When you see something running 99% a 6c/12t CPU, there is no quad core than can delivery more performance.
To put in perspective, a 6c/12t @ 4.4Ghz to be beaten in multithread from a 4c/8t has to clock roughly 45-50% higher. Find me a Kabylake that runs, without LN2, at 6.6Ghz.

 

[harney]

Since my Ryzen is send back due to the Asus board issues, and tweaking the "downgrade" I've got for the time being, I have to say this.

Anyone who says 7700K/6700K @ 4.7-5Ghz rules, doesn't have a clue what he is talking about.
Many current games, are pushing the 6800K @ 4.4Ghz across all cores, while others are running far better, even if the CPU isn't utilised fully.
The Division alone saw my fps jumping from avg 56 to 86!!! Same graphic card same settings same ram and speeds/timings. Only difference the replacement of the 6700K @ 4.7 with a 6800K @ 4.4! When the game loads his 99% on the CPU across all cores also, loading much much faster. (as did with the Ryzen 1700X at stock speeds but the perf was less due to ram speed wasn't working higher than 2133).

Same applies to TW Warhammer got fps jump on DX11 on campaign map and on battles, and even so did WOT. Which is a dual thread game, and reported that also last week with the Ryzen CPU. Reason is the game runs on core 4-5+ on both systems, and not on core 2 on the quad core, which is usually cramped with services running on it.

Also the above games had played them with the IB-E 4930K @ 4.5Ghz but the performance was worst than the 6700K @ 4.7. Possibly due to weaker IPC and DDR3 2400mhz C18 memory.
These are my observations, having passed from my hands 3 systems since last week.

Interesting thx

just out of interest what Asus board and what issues did you have i wonder if its the same i had ?

I wouldn't recommend Intel 4 core chips at the same or higher cost than Ryzen 8 or 6 chips even if the Intel is clocked higher, the Intel may have the edge in older games but it will lose out to higher core count chips in the near future.

Yes for sure in the long run Ryzen is the better chip and any builds i have to do for peeps its Ryzen all the way this will be much easier to offer once we have 4 6 cores from the 11th next month ...and from what i have been reading in threads all over the net there seems to be a lot of peeps trying to hold on to Intel defending them in any way they can

What i like about the ryzen 1700 non x is just how damn efficient it is compared to any of the Intels and beating them in Productive work while doing so..that's the real winner for AMD here

 

[humbug]

Yeah I totally agree on this. But isn't the future. Is right now. When you see something running 99% a 6c/12t CPU, there is no quad core than can delivery more performance.
To put in perspective, a 6c/12t @ 4.4Ghz to be beaten in multithread from a 4c/8t has to clock roughly 45-50% higher. Find me a Kabylake that runs, without LN2, at 6.6Ghz.

Although Joker himself didn't actually spot this all the reviewing at lower settings and all that has actually shown up what is wrong with the 7700K and the like these days, yes they can keep up but only just and they do struggle to do so.

 

[Hotwired]

Benchmarks as well are all over the place some have it faster most slower than the Intels. How can there be any differences between sites!

This review for example makes the 1800X look great for gaming.

Because each site is creating the results they want to get a different angle out.

On THAT particular review session they gimped quite a lot of things:

Throughout the testing procedure, we always use demanding presets which stress graphics cards to their absolute limits. However, in the interest of fairness, any technology which favours either AMD or NVIDIA is disabled. More specifically, this refers to PhysX, Hairworks and more. Additionally, we also disable all forms of AA to gauge performance levels which aren’t impacted by sophisticated AA. Theoretically, we could have employed FXAA because it only has a minor impact on the frame-rate, but many users strongly dislike the hazy image this causes. Apart from the details mentioned above, all settings remain at the maximum values.

They also used 2400MHz memory for all platforms, unusually low especially since we know the Intel chips can get along with much faster memory speeds than Ryzen.

No such thing as a fair test. You get the results you set it up for.

 

[Panos]

Although Joker himself didn't actually spot this all the reviewing at lower settings and all that has actually shown up what is wrong with the 7700K and the like these days, yes they can keep up but only just and they do struggle to do so.

Spoiler

Yeah I had pointed it out on both the 720p and 1080p videos. Few dozen pages back. You could run 2 clients on the Ryzen CPU while the 7700K wouldn't be able to run a single internet radio station. lolol....

Interesting thx
just out of interest what Asus board and what issues did you have i wonder if its the same i had ?

Asus Crosshair VI Hero with a 1700X.
Issues I had.
a) The system needed bios update to 0902 to boot for first time, or else I was getting error 8<blank> and spend two hours last Wednesday trying to find out, why after 22 years failed to build a PC successfully.
b) 48 hours later updated to bios 1001. Out of the blue shutdown an hour later. afterwards I was getting error 8<blank>
Tried twice to flash 0902 nothing. So I removed the cooler, clean CPU and cooler and re-install it. Only then saw the CPU and worked.
c) couple of hour later, as I was playing WOT, I saw the CPU while at stock clock, receiving 1.7v for couple of minutes raising temps and the predator getting at 100% speed, then it was down.
After that spend 5 hours until 3:30 am in the morning trying to get the system back.
Nothing worked even resetting the CPU, numerous bios cleaning and patching, every time with fresh download bios and multiple USB sticks tested, removal of battery for half hour. Nada. I was getting error 8<blank>.

This error is related to CPU power. At no point overclocked the CPU, my habit is to leave the system running at stock few days to see if all is stable. What observed was that the mobo was pushing a lot of power to the CPU even at BIOS. Never saw the CPU receiving less than 1.43v even at 3.4ghz idling.
You will find that most people run overclocked 4/4.1 Ryzen cpus at 1.4, let alone 1.43v stock.

But I said everything was left at stock.

Hence on Saturday after spending couple of hours, called OCUK to RMA the items. I was also told that would have to wait 2-3 weeks for X370 boards stock (Taichi or K7). Hence bailed out, ordered a 6800K and a GA X99 Ultra Gaming (cost me the same at the 1700X & CH6) for Sunday delivery from elsewhere, and is working since.

Around September when is my bday, I will assess the situation and buy another Ryzen. I hope until then we will have more stable boards.

 

[loxocemus]

im constantly reading ryzen will get better, it needs time to mature, but if u want 100 percent working out of the box, no issues, can it still be considered for a new build?

 

[harney]

Yeah I had pointed it out on both the 720p and 1080p videos. Few dozen pages back. You could run 2 clients on the Ryzen CPU while the 7700K wouldn't be able to run a single internet radio station. lolol....




Asus Crosshair VI Hero with a 1700X.
Issues I had.
a) The system needed bios update to 0902 to boot for first time, or else I was getting error 8<blank> and spend two hours last Wednesday trying to find out, why after 22 years failed to build a PC successfully.
b) 48 hours later updated to bios 1001. Out of the blue shutdown an hour later. afterwards I was getting error 8<blank>
Tried twice to flash 0902 nothing. So I removed the cooler, clean CPU and cooler and re-install it. Only then saw the CPU and worked.
c) couple of hour later, as I was playing WOT, I saw the CPU while at stock clock, receiving 1.7v for couple of minutes raising temps and the predator getting at 100% speed, then it was down.
After that spend 5 hours until 3:30 am in the morning trying to get the system back.
Nothing worked even resetting the CPU, numerous bios cleaning and patching, every time with fresh download bios and multiple USB sticks tested, removal of battery for half hour. Nada. I was getting error 8<blank>.

This error is related to CPU power. At no point overclocked the CPU, my habit is to leave the system running at stock few days to see if all is stable. What observed was that the mobo was pushing a lot of power to the CPU even at BIOS. Never saw the CPU receiving less than 1.43v even at 3.4ghz idling.
You will find that most people run overclocked 4/4.1 Ryzen cpus at 1.4, let alone 1.43v stock.

But I said everything was left at stock.

Hence on Saturday after spending couple of hours, called OCUK to RMA the items. I was also told that would have to wait 2-3 weeks for X370 boards stock (Taichi or K7). Hence bailed out, ordered a 6800K and a GA X99 Ultra Gaming (cost me the same at the 1700X & CH6) for Sunday delivery from elsewhere, and is working since.

Around September when is my bday, I will assess the situation and buy another Ryzen. I hope until then we will have more stable boards.

Damn not good

sry to hear this and a shame really that you had to go with Intel when you where clearly set for Ryzen ...This whole launch as been a bit a little poor really more so with the board makers.
i am sure there have been others that have had similar issues and then gone for Intel ..like i said and many others on here If AMD had held off just 1 to 2 months things would have been a little smoother with there launch

 

[Panos]

Damn not good

sry to hear this and a shame really that you had to go with Intel when you where clearly set for Ryzen ...This whole launch as been a bit a little poor really more so with the board makers.
i am sure there have been others that have had similar issues and then gone for Intel ..like i said and many others on here If AMD had held off just 1 to 2 months things would have been a little smoother with there launch

My fault actually. Sold my 6700K to a friend who was offering £400 with the Formula OC mobo and when I said OK he put the money in my paypal asking when I am going to send the parts :/ He is a good friend and didn't want to argue that I told him the parts will be for sale at the end of the month.

Usually I have my old machine gathering dust for 2-3 months, before I sell it.
Had I kept it, I would have waited replacement stock from OCUK at the end of the month. But me without PC at home, will be the same as if I get stranded in an island for the period.
(possibly the latter due to challenges is better).

 

[opethdisciple]

Wow. I think These Ryzen CPU's have been worth waiting for. They seem impressive across the board. I'm referring to cores/threads to price. AMD are really going to cause Intel some issues with this line up.

How do you think in a post Ryzen world Intel's plans for 2017/2018 have changed?

It's not like you can magically come up with a new CPU design in months and then fabricate them and ship them out in volume.

 

[humbug]

im constantly reading ryzen will get better, it needs time to mature, but if u want 100 percent working out of the box, no issues, can it still be considered for a new build?

They will get better but the point is they don't need to, they are already better than the 7700K.