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

[iHATEMacs]

They all have XFR.

No they don't. The X stands for XFR.

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/amd-...hz-socket-am4-processor-retail-cp-39v-am.html

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/amd-...hz-socket-am4-processor-retail-cp-39w-am.html

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/amd-...hz-socket-am4-processor-retail-cp-39x-am.html

Read the marketing gumph and it's missing on the 1700 and specifically says on both the 1800X and 1700X:

• "X" Version with automatic XFR overclocking

 

[8 Pack]

Did I not say in a round about way for so long overclocking is not high. This includes Memory oc.

If I say I won't buy does anyone think 5g is possible with anything other than ln2.

To me each sku within the range is simply amd binning internally for higher boost clock stability. So further headroom is very limited.

The Cpu is great at multi thread for sure and certainly rendering and such tasks.

 

[DragonQ]

The CPU Wattman apparently according to the rumours, allows to turn off cores, to push for higher overclocks on the rest.
So we shouldn't be surprised that if we can turn off half the cores on the 8c/16t, and overclock the other 4 under water pretty high.

Imagine being able to dynamically shift between 6 faster cores and 8 slightly slower cores on the fly.

 

[SiDeards73]

What I find interesting is from various leaks and rumors it puts RyZen around broadwell level performance, we know they don't overclock high on all cores, but it's still decent performance, and perfectly adequate for single thread gaming.

But to actually recommend an Intel i5 over one of these is laughable, yes we know Kabylake can get high GHz, but looking at the AMD oc tool it looks like you can dial down cores and dial up single cores etc, surely having the option to run Multithreaded when required or boosting single thread when required is better than just having a high clocked i5?

Maybe I'm just mad and think having a high clocked i5 is actually stupid when the market is graduating towards more core usuage?

I can't wait to get my hands on RyZen personally, only thing stopping me is motherboard choice at this very minute and wanting to see actual cooling and clocking on the 8/16s so I can work out the right one for me, I have a feeling it's the 1800X as I can't be bothered to OC normally.

My 4770k is running on the gigabyte auto OC and my 1070 Amp Extreme us totally stock and never even bothered to try and oc it lol

 

[AlamoX]

This looks interesting overclock control by core?

Spoiler: Overclock Tool?

yup as CPC said on their january review, the single core OC can reach 5Ghz on air.
so for multi threaded tasks Ryzen is already efficient, more than intel, and for single core tasks just bump up the core you use the most for more grunt

 

[SiDeards73]

Did I not say in a round about way for so long overclocking is not high. This includes Memory oc.

If I say I won't buy does anyone think 5g is possible with anything other than ln2.

To me each sku within the range is simply amd binning internally for higher boost clock stability. So further headroom is very limited.

The Cpu is great at multi thread for sure and certainly rendering and such tasks.

I still think it's a great gaming CPU, especially when people are still running stuff like 2500k and older and happy with current performance, Zen looks best of both worlds, you get good single threaded performance and market leading Multithreaded performance,

 

[Willis]

Maybe the Ryzen CPU's will be a bit like the R9 Fury GPU's AMD produced with not much room for overclocking.

 

[TNA]

The CPU Wattman apparently according to the rumours, allows to turn off cores, to push for higher overclocks on the rest.
So we shouldn't be surprised that if we can turn off half the cores on the 8c/16t, and overclock the other 4 under water pretty high.

That would be awesome.

 

[Bonjour]

The 1700s may be a better bet as yields improve. Currently they're probably mostly chips that didn't make the 1700x/1800x grade.

 

[TheBiznes]

@SiDeards73
My thoughts to. I am on 2600k 4,8ghz and score 161 single cine. So single thread no upgrade, but multi cores this looks very good and all credit to AMD, but will hold out for a little more info.
Especially on cooling and the gem that might be 1700 part.

 

[HellBound]

This is great Ryzen got the world record in 8 cores with LN2 before release at the amd event running 5.3ghz in cinebench. Will even get higher when release.

 

[DragonQ]

Did I not say in a round about way for so long overclocking is not high. This includes Memory oc.

If I say I won't buy does anyone think 5g is possible with anything other than ln2.

To me each sku within the range is simply amd binning internally for higher boost clock stability. So further headroom is very limited.

The Cpu is great at multi thread for sure and certainly rendering and such tasks.

Doesn't matter, look at the price. Even if you discount the "moar coars" element, the 4c8t Ryzen is going to be like half the price of an i7-7700K for say 80% of the performance (assuming it can get to 4 GHz and no further). For all but the very, very few who want those last few minimum fps bumps Ryzen will make more sense.

 

[Aretak]

I still think it's a great gaming CPU, especially when people are still running stuff like 2500k and older and happy with current performance, Zen looks best of both worlds, you get good single threaded performance and market leading Multithreaded performance,

Hopefully Watch Dogs 2 is a look into the future, with games taking better advantage of more threads. That one certainly scales well beyond eight threads, with a Haswell-based octo core whipping a Skylake i7 even with a 400MHz clock speed deficit.

Of course, you'd never buy a 5960X/6900K/6950X for that sort of boost, but now you don't have to.

 

[Reppyboyo]

Feeling a bit dumb here but I don't see what the difference is between the 1700, 1700x and 1800x except the clock speed?

 

[DragonQ]

Feeling a bit dumb here but I don't see what the difference is between the 1700, 1700x and 1800x except the clock speed?

X = XFR, 1800X is just slightly faster than 1700X at stock, possibly higher binned. 1700 has a lower TDP.

 

[Erik13]

If Amd hater like Kyle starts thread named ' don't be a pussy and buy Ryzen cpu ' you know that Amd is officially back in the business

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It's not a better gaming cpu than 7600K and overclocking is not it's strong point a decent vrm is required on the mb for sure. Multi thread and optimization for this are it's strong areas. Rendering etc it's strong.

I don't know how you are trying to justify people spending £250 to £350 on quad cores??

What you need to understand,is if the 8C/16T SKUs are £320 onwards,that means the 6C/12T ones are going to be £200 to £300.

Where do you think the 4C/4T and 4C/8T SKUs are going to be priced??

Most people are GPU limited in games and looking at the leaked pricing for the 4C/8T models,even if AMD only hits Haswell level IPC(or a bit more) and boost clocks of about 4GHZ on the top SKU,its still preferable to the overpriced Core i5 7600K which will cost more and add the fact that most gamers don't even overclock.

Look at some game tests from an actual gaming site,like Eurogamer:

http://i.imgur.com/FW0KpFV.png



Look where an the massively hyped Core i5 7600K is even against a Core i7 4790K at a lower clockspeed?? That is with an overclocked Titan X at 1080P.

Even an overclocked IB Core i7 holds its own.

People need to get over this obsession with MOAR MHZ and benchmarks at 720P.

 

[karik666]

Feeling a bit dumb here but I don't see what the difference is between the 1700, 1700x and 1800x except the clock speed?

yes its just the base clock and boost clock that is the difference.

 

[Aretak]

Feeling a bit dumb here but I don't see what the difference is between the 1700, 1700x and 1800x except the clock speed?

Just the clock speed. The 1700 also lacks the XFR feature that overclocks automatically beyond the boost clock, but reports suggest that's only worth 100MHz or so anyway. It could also be the case that the higher end models are binned better and will overclock higher, but nobody knows that for sure right now.

X = XFR, 1800X is just slightly faster than 1700X at stock, possibly higher binned. 1700 has a lower TDP.

The lower TDP is just a factor of it being clocked lower though. It doesn't necessarily imply that it can't reach the same speeds, as it only applies at stock. To use the Phenom II X6 lineup as an example, the 1055T clocked at under 3GHz had a 95W TDP, yet you could crank it up to 4GHz just like the 125W 1100T. It really depends on how/if AMD is aggressively binning the chips or not, which we won't know for a while until people have them and we start seeing what the average overclock is.

 

[Thekwango]

Doesn't matter, look at the price. Even if you discount the "moar coars" element, the 4c8t Ryzen is going to be like half the price of an i7-7700K for say 80% of the performance (assuming it can get to 4 GHz and no further). For all but the very, very few who want those last few minimum fps bumps Ryzen will make more sense.

exactly - 'moar cores/moar speed/bench marks rule - chest pump chest pump' matter very little to the vast majority of end users. be interesting to see if intel are forced to reduce the price of the likes of the i7-7700K