• 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" ?

Anandtech have applied the Spectre and Meltdown Patches
is performing the benchmarks in the target situation ,and equal .
Testing with Spectre and Meltdown Patches Applied

For our testing on the new AMD Ryzen 2000-series processors and the Intel processors, we enabled the latest version of Microsoft Windows with the latest updates and also BIOS microcode updates to ensure that the Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilites were as patched as could possibly be. This means that some of the data used in this review is not comparable to previous reviews, however in time we expect our benchmark database to be up to date with these patches.
 
Annadtech seem like they have the full intel and amd patch set for spectre and meltdown and have retested every intel system with this.
The other sites may not have any patches or have mixed windows/bios patches of different versions.. might be the reason annadtechs looks so different.
If annad is indeed representative of the current state then Intel has a rather large problem, even if its not the new refresh is well worth taking over the blue chips for most.
 
Just bought a 2700X, Asus ROG Strix X470 mobo and 16GB of Teamgroup 3200MHz.
Was supposed to be upgrading GPU but what the hey...

Would've been good except Paypal, instead of asking which card to charge, sucked it out of my current account (there was not enough in there!), so I've just had to belt it down to the bank with a large cash sub.
Happy days!
 
opethdisciple said:
Be honest. Is running your ram at xmp on the Intel platform a walk in the park?
Click to expand...

for me on ddr4 assuming non faulty software yes, on ddr3 it wasnt.

On ddr3 I had to manually tweak timings on second set of ram on haswell, first set of ram wouldnt get stable regardless at ram rated speed.
On coffee lake I originally had posting issues but turned out to be faulty motherboard cpu socket (from rain forest which was a previously returned board sold as new), good board from OCUK with the 8pack ram, XMP perfect straight away, and I even followed 8packs advice to lower IMC voltage from stock for free temp gains and still stable.

My ddr3 experience on intel wasnt great tho.
 
humbug said:
Quick glance, this looks really very promising... that's just 5% to the 8700K

pnCPV7s.png
Click to expand...

you know what annoys me about that graph is they have the 6600k but not the 8600k. Also missing r5 chips. These reviewers do seem to post strange lists of tested parts. For BF1 on intel I expect the gains from 6600k to 8700k are mostly down to the improved per core performance and 2 extra "real" cores, logical cores probably close to 0% performance gain would be proven if the 8600k was on there which is why I believe its ommitted. For BF1 on AMD its just really odd there is no ryzen1 chips on that page, and that they only comparing to one 8xxx series intel chip.
 
chrcoluk said:
you know what annoys me about that graph is they have the 6600k but not the 8600k. Also missing r5 chips. These reviewers do seem to post strange lists of tested parts. For BF1 on intel I expect the gains from 6600k to 8700k are mostly down to the improved per core performance and 2 extra "real" cores, logical cores probably close to 0% performance gain would be proven if the 8600k was on there which is why I believe its ommitted. For BF1 on AMD its just really odd there is no ryzen1 chips on that page, and that they only comparing to one 8xxx series intel chip.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you're right that is a bit odd, its not the only slide, in the same review some CPU's are there on some slides, missing on others, WTF?
 
[Death] said:
Yup they never show the oc on 8700
Click to expand...

Also why is the OC 2700X slower than the stock 2700X, odd graph.

So missing 8600k and 8700k OC, showing the chips at a speed most wont run at and a odd result for the 2700X OC. Bizarre.

Also the 8400 was probably in a ROG motherboard, and I wonder how many 8400 owners will pair that chip with a overclocking board so they can bypass the low TDP limit and clock throttles.
 
Mickcas said:
I'm waiting on reviews with x370 boards. If these clocks and voltages can be had I'd be tempted to swap my 1700 out
Click to expand...

Would be interesting to see how much we'll be missing out, all the turbo improvements seems to remove the point in overclocking yourself. Still, even though there seems to be decent improvements it doesn't seem worth upgrading for me. Maybe if the 8 cores becomes cheaper over time.

Zen 2 please hurry.
 
thanks cat the fifth, actually a good show of cpus there, 8700k shamed by 8600k
8400 over performing I expect due to been on a Z series board
AMD 2xxxx chips healthy boost over 1xxxx chips.
 
~>Dg<~ said:
i5 8400 just got even better value gaming chip wise.
Click to expand...

Everything basically shows this as being v close with gpu removed from the scores. Anyone at 1440p should buy whatever fits their budget. Nothing will move until the next gpu power uplift. Identical for any serious gaming, the AMD chip is better everywhere else.
What's actually left for Intel here? Price..? Seen some hefty discounts already. They seem to consider themselves licked and have gone for being the budget option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom