AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***

[SirPsychoZe0]

really hard to say until you have it in front of you and its tested. I mean take the Ryzen 5 2600x for example, on paper it has the same number of cores and threads and a higher clock speed than Intel's i7 8700 (at base) yet in the majority of benchmarks, the i7 performs better.

It's a hard one to call I know. I suppose what I'm thinking is whether a i7 8700k now (because the 9th series can get stuffed from a value perspective!) would be a bad move from a gaming perspective, i.e. is Ryzen going to deliver 10-20 FPS increase or avoid future CPU bottlenecking by X years more than the i7.

 

[humbug]

It's a hard one to call I know. I suppose what I'm thinking is whether a i7 8700k now (because the 9th series can get stuffed from a value perspective!) would be a bad move from a gaming perspective, i.e. is Ryzen going to deliver 10-20 FPS increase or avoid future CPU bottlenecking by X years more than the i7.

The 8700K is really the best gaming CPU as of now, it is a very good CPU actually and if you have a 1080TI or anything above you should go out and buy it because only it or the other equivalent Intel CPU's will get the most out of a GPU like that.

I think the 6 core Ryzen 3000 replacement for the current Ryzen 2000 will match the 8700K for Gaming, and it will do it for the price of a coffeelake i3.

That's the crucial thing here, AMD are not going to kick Intel's bum with some magic Ryzen 3000, i think they will take away Intel's performance lead entirely for a cost at way below were Intel are willing to go.

In May we will have a $170 8700K, and it'll be a lower tier Ryzen 3000.

For now, the 8700K is king.

 

[SirPsychoZe0]

The 8700K is really the best gaming CPU as of now, it is a very good CPU actually and if you have a 1080TI or anything above you should go out and buy it because only it or the other equivalent Intel CPU's will get the most out of a GPU like that.

I think the 6 core Ryzen 3000 replacement for the current Ryzen 2000 will match the 8700K for Gaming, and it will do it for the price of a coffeelake i3.

That's the crucial thing here, AMD are not going to kick Intel's bum with some magic Ryzen 3000, i think they will take away Intel's performance lead entirely for a cost at way below were Intel are willing to go.

In May we will have a $170 8700K, and it'll be a lower tier Ryzen 3000.

For now, the 8700K is king.

So you think it's mainly about better value than it is better performance (albeit there might be some improvement). Setting price aside for a moment, if i7 8700k will be in the same broad performance category then I might take the plunge. I know I might be worst off financially, but I'd prefer it if it means stutter-free gaming over Christmas (being the one period I get off work to properly game throughout the entire year). Time to use the thing is a factor!

 

[humbug]

So you think it's mainly about better value than it is better performance (albeit there might be some improvement). Setting price aside for a moment, if i7 8700k will be in the same broad performance category then I might take the plunge. I know I might be worst off financially, but I'd prefer it if it means stutter-free gaming over Christmas (being the one period I get off work to properly game throughout the entire year). Time to use the thing is a factor!

For Games, which is what you are talking about, I do think its about value, i don't think AMD will beat Intel in games because games don't use more than 6 SMT cores, AMD will catchup on per core performance but because their tier of core counts will be a higher number at a much lower cost tier what you will get is an 'AMD Ryzen 8700K' in the i3 price bracket and a 7960X in the 9900K price bracket.

 

[SirPsychoZe0]

For Games, which is what you are talking about, I do think its about value, i don't think AMD will beat Intel in games because games don't use more than 6 SMT cores, AMD will catchup on per core performance but because their tier of core counts will be a higher number at a much lower cost tier what you will get is an 'AMD Ryzen 8700K' in the i3 price bracket and a 7960X in the 9900K price bracket.

That's good to know, thanks for the input and help. I'm always cautious of upgrading on the eve of something which might offer a significant performance leap.

 

[humbug]

No Problem

 

[spoffle]

Stating previously I'd totally brain-farted and then making self-deprecating jokes about the egg on my face totally shows I can't take criticism

I have a few minutes free at work, I can Photoshop you up a "LePhuronn gone fkd up" badge if it'll make you feel a bit more superior? Because I'm nice like that.

Superior? Oof, the complex is coming through.

You're complaining about being ripped. All I'm saying is that this is what happens when you try to correct someone on something while being wrong.

 

[LePhuronn]

You're complaining about being ripped. All I'm saying is that this is what happens when you try to correct someone on something while being wrong.

Oh dear...I'm not complaining. I said I brain farted. I stated clearly how I screwed up. I even made a joke about how embarrassing it was. And yet that doesn't seem to be good enough for you, claiming I'm being superior, can't take criticism and generally now writing your own narrative.

And who's actually ripping me for it? A couple of corrections and a "whoops, that's embarrassing". It was a hell of a goof on my part, I'm not quite sure why it's now riled you up so much.

Now leave it, yeah?

 

[spoffle]

Oh dear...I'm not complaining. I said I brain farted. I stated clearly how I screwed up. I even made a joke about how embarrassing it was. And yet that doesn't seem to be good enough for you, claiming I'm being superior, can't take criticism and generally now writing your own narrative.

And who's actually ripping me for it? A couple of corrections and a "whoops, that's embarrassing". It was a hell of a goof on my part, I'm not quite sure why it's now riled you up so much.

Now leave it, yeah?

I was saying you were complaining, because you were.

 

[EsaT]

but I'd prefer it if it means stutter-free gaming...

Worst stutter would be caused by background processes, which we have god awful amount nowadays, causing momentary "clog" ups of CPU cores.
Similar to when everything keeps halting to crawl, because PC starts loading something not fitting into memory etc.
During past years of quad core being desktop high end, I've multiple times read people saying, that their other PC with some lower clock/peak performance higher core count CPU gave better overall smoothness, than other PC's faster quad core.
Current Ryzens certainly fare well in ability to avoid those stutters with lots of cores/threads.
And if these 7nm Zen2 clock speeds realize I think Intel is going to loose peak performance lead, except in the most heavily Intel favouring code.
Wouldn't even need real IPC advance from Zen2 against 8700K.

Though of course running always on Vsync, when not capable to constantly achieving frame rate equal to refresh rate of display, is also effective stutter generator...

 

[coupe69]

So you think it's mainly about better value than it is better performance (albeit there might be some improvement). Setting price aside for a moment, if i7 8700k will be in the same broad performance category then I might take the plunge. I know I might be worst off financially, but I'd prefer it if it means stutter-free gaming over Christmas (being the one period I get off work to properly game throughout the entire year). Time to use the thing is a factor!

Just FYI. I've gone from a 4 core 8 thread Sandybridge-E i7 to a 6 core 12 thread Ryzen 5 2600, I've noticed no "stutter" in games with either setup @ 1440P capped at 60 and a GTX 1080.

 

[humbug]

My last CPU, 4690K @ 4.5Ghz, it couldn't run my GTX 1070 properly, sometimes at least not without maxing out on all cores, bloody awful micro-stutter.
With the Ryzen 1600, despite being 600Mhz down on the 4690K frees the GPU to stretch its legs, and no more stutter.

The first Video, Star Citizen is very heavy on the CPU, just watch the first 20 seconds of it, OSD top left.
Switching that to the 1600 doubled my frame rates.

Click on spoilers for quick view.

Spoiler

Spoiler

In fact i would go as far as to say the 4690K was crap compared with the Ryzen 1600, £220 crap.

Thank #### for competition.

Star Citizen have a telemetry page, what they do is monitor your performance, with this page you can compare your performance to similar systems.

The CPU comparison they make with my Ryzen 1600 is an 8700K, of course i'm overclocked but the clocks i'm running are close to what 8700K's run out of the box.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/telemetry

Spoiler

 

[KentMan]

My last CPU, 4690K @ 4.5Ghz, it couldn't run my GTX 1070 properly, sometimes at least not without maxing out on all cores, bloody awful micro-stutter.
With the Ryzen 1600, despite being 600Mhz down on the 4690K frees the GPU to stretch its legs, and no more stutter.

The first Video, Star Citizen is very heavy on the CPU, just watch the first 20 seconds of it, OSD top left.
Switching that to the 1600 doubled my frame rates.

Click on spoilers for quick view.

Spoiler

Spoiler

In fact i would go as far as to say the 4690K was crap compared with the Ryzen 1600, £220 crap.

Thank #### for competition.

I had similiar issues with my 4770k, it started to stutter more frequently in newer CPU bound games, Grim Dawn, WoW etc.. swapped to 1700 gained a small fps increase but it was immediately smoother.

 

[bakes0310]

Would my 6700k be facing similar issues?

 

[Steveocee]

The 8700K is really the best gaming CPU as of now, it is a very good CPU actually and if you have a 1080TI or anything above you should go out and buy it because only it or the other equivalent Intel CPU's will get the most out of a GPU like that.

I think the 6 core Ryzen 3000 replacement for the current Ryzen 2000 will match the 8700K for Gaming, and it will do it for the price of a coffeelake i3.

That's the crucial thing here, AMD are not going to kick Intel's bum with some magic Ryzen 3000, i think they will take away Intel's performance lead entirely for a cost at way below were Intel are willing to go.

In May we will have a $170 8700K, and it'll be a lower tier Ryzen 3000.

For now, the 8700K is king.

I think with this you are spot on (and I admit in the past I've been a relatively harsh critic of yours). AMD should eradicate the performance gulf with this next strain if Intel stay as they are and the pricing for that will be far better for the end user.

 

[humbug]

Then i'm glad we could agree

 

[humbug]

Would my 6700k be facing similar issues?

Much less so because its a faster DDR4 8 thread CPU, but its performance longevity is in serious doubt.

 

[jigger]

Would my 6700k be facing similar issues?

I upgraded from a 4.8Ghz Xeon i7 Skylake to an 1800X at 4.1Ghz and for gaming the performance is very close.

 

[humbug]

For comparisons sake
4690K @ 4.6Ghz

Ryzen 1600 @ 3.85Ghz

Some Background, Star Citizen is the MP part to the Campaign Squadron 42, which is thought to be released at the end of next year, its very much the next couple of generations of PC only game.

Trailer to SQ42. musty be watched in 4K.

Star Citizen (as it currently stands) trailer, its only about 5% done, it will probably go into Beta soon after SQ42 release.

And just because i like it

And a player made video

Spoiler: Shameless plug

I know, but for PC gamers its worth drawing attention to.

Anyway, if this game is anything to go by trust me games in a couple of years will need 12 thread CPU's minimum.

 

[andy_mk3]

Anyway, if this game is anything to go by trust me games in a couple of years will need 12 thread CPU's minimum.

I think the XBO and PS4 are both 8 core so surely that's a good step in the right direction? I definitely think games will soon takes advantage of more threads, plenty of games out now can make use of more than 4 cores that's for sure!