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

[SiDeards73]

240mm AIO cooler, made by Asetek with two fans on it. This was a retail 1700, not engineering sample! A bad 1700 might only do 3.8-3.9 and a good one might do 4.0-4.1, but only in top-end boards like Crosshair and Taichi.

Memory wise we had best success with Crosshair which just about does 3000MHz, no other board has achieved over 2666 stable yet.

Though 8 Pack is yet to play, this is just our quick testing, 8 Pack shall start playing in coming weeks.

Hmm very interesting... if the 1700 are able to hit 4.0ghz on a 240mm Asetek AIO, no insult to that AIO but there are a lot better on the market, then a decent AIO @ 280mm or proper WC Loop will prob eek a little more, wondering if the 1700X is the smarter buy, your getting a potentially better binned chip than the 1700 with a garaunteed clock, but obviously some defect which meant it didnt make it as an 1800X, decisions decisions..

 

[SiDeards73]

So, if the 1800X is ~9% faster than the 6900k...

It's about ~0.8% better IPC than Broadwell, with the rest of the gains coming from higher clocks.

So, I'd expect Skylake/Kaby Lake to be ~5% faster IPC than Ryzen.

Kaby Lake, 7700k, will hit ~4.8GHz pretty reliably, 5GHz if you delid.

7700k is ~£50 cheaper than 1700X, and clocked 18.4% higher, so I'd expect ~24% better single thread performance than 1700X at stock, rising to 32% if overclocked to 4.8GHz. For less money.

Unless Ryzen really does overclock well, the 7700k is still a better buy for most people, only if you need 8 cores (and most people still don't) is Ryzen going to be worth it.

Yeah? no....

Recent games beg to differ uk-thl-lsg-DrakeEnergyProject-001CostTracking-Read; uk-thl-lsg-DrakeEnergyProject-002Contracts-Read; uk-thl-lsg-DrakeEnergyProject-Modify

I know and understand what your saying but higher IPC on lower cores it seems does not mean you will always beat pure brute force of more cores.

 

[Gibbo]

So, if the 1800X is ~9% faster than the 6900k...

It's about ~0.8% better IPC than Broadwell, with the rest of the gains coming from higher clocks.

So, I'd expect Skylake/Kaby Lake to be ~5% faster IPC than Ryzen.

Kaby Lake, 7700k, will hit ~4.8GHz pretty reliably, 5GHz if you delid.

7700k is ~£50 cheaper than 1700X, and clocked 18.4% higher, so I'd expect ~24% better single thread performance than 1700X at stock, rising to 32% if overclocked to 4.8GHz. For less money.

Unless Ryzen really does overclock well, the 7700k is still a better buy for most people, only if you need 8 cores (and most people still don't) is Ryzen going to be worth it.

Kaby Lake is king of single thread performance, this was expected and is the case.

Ryzen is king of multi-thread performance and as now so many people play online with upto 64 player maps in games like BF4 etc. this is where Ryzen becomes better platform and of course the OS feels smoother too as OS can take advantage of cores.

Software and games are becoming more supportive of multi cores over outright MHz and as such Ryzen has great future!

 

[SiDeards73]

Kaby Lake is king of single thread performance, this was expected and is the case.

Ryzen is king of multi-thread performance and as now so many people play online with upto 64 player maps in games like BF4 etc. this is where Ryzen becomes better platform and of course the OS feels smoother too as OS can take advantage of cores.

Software and games are becoming more supportive of multi cores over outright MHz and as such Ryzen has great future!

There we go folks, pretty much summed it up exactly how it is and how it will end up being. I can almost garauntee Intel will now bring out more cores at a cheaper price point than their current offerings to compete, AMD have pretty much in one move pushed the whole CPU industry forward a huge amount.

 

[Hagar]

Wow.... just wow.

There is a lot of disposable in this forum

 

[HeX]

we just tested a 1700, it hit 4.0GHz stable in everything, but ONLY in the Crosshair mainboard, the lower-end boards it was hovering around 3.80GHz as the VRM's were cooking with extra voltage. It however was maxing around 4050MHz, so I'd say 1700 can do 3.9-4.1GHz, of course the 1800X will probably do 4.1-4.3 as no doubt better binned, but if your clocking the motherboard has a big impact on the overclock and so far Asus Crosshair and Asrock Taichi seem the best two.

Was that on water or air?

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Unless Ryzen really does overclock well, the 7700k is still a better buy for most people, only if you need 8 cores (and most people still don't) is Ryzen going to be worth it.

I need more cores - Ryzen will be my next upgrade. Waiting for reviews re oc'ing to decide whether its a 1700, 1700x or 1800x.

 

[shankly1985]

Kaby Lake is king of single thread performance, this was expected and is the case.

Ryzen is king of multi-thread performance and as now so many people play online with upto 64 player maps in games like BF4 etc. this is where Ryzen becomes better platform and of course the OS feels smoother too as OS can take advantage of cores.

Software and games are becoming more supportive of multi cores over outright MHz and as such Ryzen has great future!

But 8pack says otherwise I guess he dont play much games and only Overclocks? His words that games are not using more than single core "Mind Blown"

 

[theor14]

Asus prime x370 or msi pro carbon for best OC at that price point ?

 

[Techen]

Why we comparing a 7700k to a ryzen 7?? So confused lol

 

[Silent_Scone]

oc ing is niche, people like me with kids don't have time to spend hours tweaking voltages, that's valuable gaming time

Heh, you don't have time to overclock because you have kids? If you know the platform, half of it is walking away from the machine and let the system stress. Hardly an excuse.

 

[Uriel]

Why we comparing a 7700k to a ryzen 7?? So confused lol

Well for a little while, Ryzen is only a little bit cheaper. Same price ballpark just now.

 

[Silent_Scone]

I am not biased towards either!

But we just tested a 1700, it hit 4.0GHz stable in everything, but ONLY in the Crosshair mainboard, the lower-end boards it was hovering around 3.80GHz as the VRM's were cooking with extra voltage. It however was maxing around 4050MHz, so I'd say 1700 can do 3.9-4.1GHz, of course the 1800X will probably do 4.1-4.3 as no doubt better binned, but if your clocking the motherboard has a big impact on the overclock and so far Asus Crosshair and Asrock Taichi seem the best two.

I say it how it is, Intel is still selling and always will, we have no exposure on Intel.

Probably more to do with the firmware. It's the Crosshair for me, though

 

[SiDeards73]

Heh, you don't have time to overclock because you have kids? If you know the platform, half of it is walking away from the machine and let the system stress. Hardly an excuse.

Its also very boring? all that time waiting for it to stress test when you could be using it for, you know, playing games?

I set that Gigabyte Auto OC profile in the Windows APP, Job done, to be honest though i would just prefer to buy a chip thats pre OC'd close to its maximum so i know im not missing out on much of its theoretical performance and just have it done, no stressing or messing about waiting for tests etc, plug it in, fire it up, enjoy

 

[TaKeN]

So the rumours about Ryzen being a poor clocker are true then?

Silent Scone deserves an apology from a few people I feel

 

[humbug]

So, if the 1800X is ~9% faster than the 6900k...

It's about ~0.8% better IPC than Broadwell, with the rest of the gains coming from higher clocks.

So, I'd expect Skylake/Kaby Lake to be ~5% faster IPC than Ryzen.

Kaby Lake, 7700k, will hit ~4.8GHz pretty reliably, 5GHz if you delid.

7700k is ~£50 cheaper than 1700X, and clocked 18.4% higher, so I'd expect ~24% better single thread performance than 1700X at stock, rising to 32% if overclocked to 4.8GHz. For less money.

Unless Ryzen really does overclock well, the 7700k is still a better buy for most people, only if you need 8 cores (and most people still don't) is Ryzen going to be worth it.

KabyLake has the same IPC as SkyLake which has the same IPC as Broadwell, infact in some cases Broadwell does better than SkyLake clock for clock, like Cinebench, the reason is its quad channel IMC.

IMO you are right that the 7700K clocking to 4.8Ghz will be faster in single threaded vs a 4Ghz RyZen, but IMO nothing like 24%, more like 15% which is still significant, but in reality i don't think it makes a significant difference because this idea that most or even all games don't scale beyond 4 or even HT threads is utter nonsense, i can pull up a whole bunch of game slides to prove its an over exaggerated myth.

While on the subject of exaggeration, single core performance vs RyZen is already being used as the be all and end all of what matters in performance, reality is very different, Intel no longer have a 60% IPC advantage, if anything AMD now have a small IPC advantage so an AMD chip now having twice as many threads for the same money quiet often actually puts AMD significantly ahead of Intel, even in some games.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Why we comparing a 7700k to a ryzen 7?? So confused lol

Because Super Pi is very important you see. The obsession with MOAR MHZ is why Intel is now selling a £175 Core i3 7350K and the whole range under it is dual cores.

Even if the 4C/8T Ryzen is more like a Core i7 4770K for £200ish,I think for most people buying one of those and spending the £150 saved over the Core i7 7700K on a better graphics card makes more sense.

 

[ubersonic]

So the rumours about Ryzen being a poor clocker are true then?

From what Gibbo said it looks like more a case of budget motherboards being poor at overclocking, which was also the case with AM3 (and Intel boards before they banned overclocking on cheap boards).

 

[SiDeards73]

KabyLake has the same IPC as SkyLake which has the same IPC as Broadwell, infact in some cases Broadwell does better than SkyLake clock for clock, like Cinebench, the reason is its quad channel IMC.

IMO you are right that the 7700K clocking to 4.8Ghz will be faster in single threaded vs a 4Ghz RyZen, but IMO nothing like 24%, more like 15% which is still significant, but in reality i don't think it makes a significant difference because this idea that most or even all games don't scale beyond 4 or even HT threads is utter nonsense, i can pull up a whole bunch of game slides to prove its an over exaggerated myth.

While on the subject of exaggeration, single core performance vs RyZen is already being used as the be all and end all of what matters in performance, reality is very different, Intel no longer have a 60% IPC advantage, if anything AMD now have a small IPC advantage so an AMD chip now having twice as many threads for the same money quiet often actually puts AMD significantly ahead of Intel, even in some games.

Kinda funny cos even if it was 25% if your getting 100fps in a game on Ryzen and 125fps on a clocked 7700k your not really going to notice it too much, if your using an adaptive sync monitor, your not going to notice it at all, only question is really minimums, and both of those chips will have you ok in that area.

 

[five8five]

So the rumours about Ryzen being a poor clocker are true then?

Silent Scone deserves an apology from a few people I feel

Somehow I don't think he'll get it. 8 pack said the same thing and look how he's being treated at the moment