• 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.

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

I feel disappointed..but that is just me should have been wiser..

yeah 2ghz difference between 7700k and 1700 but i doubt that a 1700 can do 5ghz unless you use liquid nitrogen.

Atm too be honest i will be sticking with intel if benchmarks like these are like that.

i7 7700k or 1700, i'd pick the 7700k but then the 1700 scores higher due to multi core but games use 4 cores so what is the point.
 
brigantium said:
I'm not alarmed either, I knew GTA V benchmarks would be the first ones to hurt because more cores are irrelevant for it, maybe with OC it can match a 6700K... but then Intel will probably make it cheaper than the 1700, competition is always a profit for us.
Click to expand...

Thats the thing if a low clocked Ryzen 8C is doing that well - what about the top bin 95W 4C and 6C SKUs??
 
Thing is, if you watch the entire DinoPC video, he's actually quite impressed with it overall on the limited testing he's done so far. We all knew Zen would lose in some places, but it will be stronger in others. That's part the fun :)

What we will see as this shows I suspect is the OC'd/higher clocked Zen's falling a little behind high clocked Kaby/Skylake, but beating them substantially on anything which really benefits from multicore with the 6c/8c models.
 
lltfdaniel said:
I feel disappointed..but that is just me should have been wiser..

yeah 2ghz difference between 7700k and 1700 but i doubt that a 1700 can do 5ghz unless you use liquid nitrogen.
Click to expand...

?? Its a 65W TDP 8C chip running at stock clockspeeds with no XFR. Don't you get it probably is hitting a TDP limit at 65W??

The 95W TDP models will be running at a much higher clockspeed anyway - the R7 1800X has a 20% increase in base clockspeeds.

If this is what a 65W TDP 8C is doing,I hate to think what the 95W 4C and 6C models will do - they will be running at much higher clockspeeds.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
?? Its a 65W TDP 8C chip running at stock clockspeeds with no XFR. Don't you get it probably is hitting a TDP limit at 65W??

The 95W TDP models will be running at a much higher clockspeed anyway - the R7 1800X has a 20% increase in base clockspeeds.

If this is what a 65W TDP 8C is doing,I hate to think what the 95W 4C and 6C models will do - they will be running at much higher clockspeeds.
Click to expand...

Right i see it wasn't clear to me regarding clockspeed.
 
Alexrose1uk said:
Thing is, if you watch the entire DinoPC video, he's actually quite impressed with it overall on the limited testing he's done so far. We all knew Zen would lose in some places, but it will be stronger in others. That's part the fun :)

What we will see as this shows I suspect is the OC'd/higher clocked Zen's falling a little behind high clocked Kaby/Skylake, but beating them substantially on anything which really benefits from multicore.
Click to expand...

That is what is interesting its keeping up despite a massive clockspeed deficit and a 65W TDP - the Intel CPU is rated at 91W.

Now what happens with the R7 1800X and its 95W TDP??

LMAO,why don't we try benchmarking a 65W Core i7 7700S against a 95W TDP R7 1800X??

:p
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
GTAV seems to not scale that well with cores anyway:

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/991/bench/CPU_01.png
http://media.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2015/game-bench/gta-v-cpu-1080-max.jpg

LOL,I would love to see that R7 1700 overclocked too. Its a 65W TDP 3.0GHZ to 3.7GHZ against a 91W TDP Core i7 7700K.

Look at how bad an FX8370 is doing in that title.

It seems to prefer 4 strong cores,meaning even at a lower clockspeed Ryzen is doing much better than it should.



Agreed.
Click to expand...
Ah, I was mistaken about GTA V scaling well over 4+ cores then. Makes more sense now.
 
Wonder when people will notice at stock the 1700 is a 65W chip, it won't have high all/most core turbo clocks because of the TDP. Whack the tdp up to just 95W and you'll probably go from 3.1Ghz or so to 3.6-3.7Ghz, a 20% difference which will have a very large effect in the mins and maximums, not much on average though. The average should really point out how often those mins and maxes are happening(not much).

But this is life, everything is a bit of a trade off. Personally the thing I hate about the 7700k is this, it's £360, in that GTA benchmark at most £200's worth of silicon is being used.

Some games will do better with the higher core clock speeds, some will do better with more threads even at lower clock speeds.

The fact is the 7700k is not a 6 or 8 core chip. The 6/8/10 core chips Intel sells, that cost much more than Zen have lower clock speeds (except the 65W 1700, understandably). Zen will be faster in gaming than Broadwell-e, maybe equal to skylake-x.. we've yet to see what that really is though, but I suspect again because of the TDP the clock speeds will be more in line with Zen 1800x.

I'd put money on a 1700 set to a higher tdp and around 4Ghz would be pretty close to 38fps minimums of the 7700k.
 
lltfdaniel said:
Right i see it wasn't clear to me regarding clockspeed.
Click to expand...

It could be quite possible Ryzen IPC is meh,but ATM,it looks a massive increase in that game over previous AMD CPUs,so the cores need to be strong.

If you look at the CB R15 score,the Intel CPU is clocked 24% higher for a 32% higher score in the ST benchmark. So,in CB it seems SKL ST is nearly 10% better regarding IPC in a benchmark which favours Intel.

Also if you look at the SMT scaling,AMD actually seems to scale better with SMT too.

My take from that is the 4C/8T SKUs might actually have quite strong multi-threaded performance overall.
 
Also it's weird that on Cinebench screen he wrote 3.4ghz speed. Does it mean he was running it even without turbo? He didn't specify speed for GTA
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
?? Its a 65W TDP 8C chip running at stock clockspeeds with no XFR. Don't you get it probably is hitting a TDP limit at 65W??

The 95W TDP models will be running at a much higher clockspeed anyway - the R7 1800X has a 20% increase in base clockspeeds.

If this is what a 65W TDP 8C is doing,I hate to think what the 95W 4C and 6C models will do - they will be running at much higher clockspeeds.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I'm back on board the hype train.

Toot toot.
 
kieran_read said:
I'm currently watching the Vid, he said the 7700k is running at 4.4 and the 1700 is stock (Didn't have time to OC)
Click to expand...


I'd ignore test, 1700, base is 3.0GHz, turbo is 3.7GHz, AMD do this so it qualify as 65W part. If you switch it over to manual mode in a good motherboard like Crosshair you just lock it to run at 4GHz all the time, then the performance is vastly better, even beats 1800X. :)
 
kieran_read said:
I'm currently watching the Vid, he said the 7700k is running at 4.4 and the 1700 is stock (Didn't have time to OC)
Click to expand...

Its why we need to see how the R7 1800X performs as it is less TDP constrained.

Its also why the 4C and 6C models might even be better - they will have far more TDP available per core to hit higher clockspeeds. If the 8C models are even remotely competitive,it really is a good indication where the lower end SKUs will land.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom