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

[harney]

Just like an entire iteration of the P4 following the A64's launch.

So true

come to think of it i never liked Intel always thought they where way overpriced even back in the 486 days but hats off to Intel with the core 2 & on ward times...

If i could i would have stuck with AMD but hard to resist that core 2 performance

glad there back in the game for all of us ...

Anybody else have a bad taste in the mouth re Intel and there trickle drip feeding performance and sky rocket prices per core ?

 

[woppy101]

specualtion much the 7700k is still going to be quicker than most of you mention yet with no knowledge the new stuff is quicker lol.amd pulled a blinder here they got people buying on speculation with no benchmarks.i can tell you now when the actual benchmarks hit and people see chips like 7700k still ahead and with price reductions its going to make fun reading.

i love that amd have a decent range of cpus coming but just dont jump in double footed just yet.

Everything I have seen you post has been knocking AMD are you that in love with your beloved intel that nothing can compare to it?

 

[TNA]

Hes tied up in the AMD basement for breaking NDA

I heard he just arrived at AMD HQ and has been taken to the secret panic room where Lisa Su has put a ball gag on him and got her whip out

 

[harney]

If you look at the alleged full Ryzen Lineup, there are two models at each ?c?t grade: one X, one non-X. Except 8c16t where there are 3 models.

I'm starting to think they got better yields of working 8c16t parts than they expected and so crammed in an extra cheaper model at the last minute.

Probably what is now called the 1700X would have originally been called 1700.

Could be a valid point ...but could be they had not so good yields hence we have the 1700

I would love to know how they sort these chips out what makes a chip be a 1700 or 1700x ,1800x

are the 1700 b grades of the X types ?

would love to know ....i personally can not see them having the time to pick sort out the good ones and just randomly stamp them who knows?

 

[Boot_Loop]

specualtion much the 7700k is still going to be quicker than most of you mention yet with no knowledge the new stuff is quicker lol.amd pulled a blinder here they got people buying on speculation with no benchmarks.i can tell you now when the actual benchmarks hit and people see chips like 7700k still ahead and with price reductions its going to make fun reading.
.

I keep seeing this. When you say we might see gaming benchmarks where the '7700K is ahead', what exactly are you expecting? 1,2,3,4 or 5 fps more? 90fps instead of 87 fps for the Ryzens?

Realistically, this is what we are talking about here, as 99.99% of gamers don't have a Titan X to expose the CPU as any kind of bottleneck and don't play at 720p. So you are talking about absolutely negligible and inconsequential 'leads' in average fps for the 7700K, if any.

I mean look:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10968...w-review-the-new-stock-performance-champion/8

This is the normal set-up for 'gamers' with a card on the level of a GTX 980 or 390X and as you can see, the 7700K's 'lead' over a 2600K is under FIVE fps. So I don't understand how people are expecting the 7700K to have anything other than an utterly inconsequential performance edge over the Ryzen's in normal set-ups.

 

[labbby]

I heard he just arrived at AMD HQ and has been taken to the secret panic room where Lisa Su has put a ball gag on him and got her whip out

haha this just made me spit my tea out in laughter... now goes to look for a new pc monitor...

 

[Hotwired]

Could be a valid point ...but could be they had not so good yields hence we have the 1700

I would love to know how they sort these chips out what makes a chip be a 1700 or 1700x ,1800x

are the 1700 b grades of the X types ?

would love to know ....i personally can not see them having the time to pick sort out the good ones and just randomly stamp them who knows?

Well, basing an assumption on the overclocked systems OCUK are listing and what Gibbo said the 1700 and 1700x are justabout making it to 4.0.

But the 1800x starts at 4.0 with a known boost depending on cooling to 4.1 before any overclocking, it's heavily pointing to it all being the same chip but binned.

 

[harney]

AMD Ryzen test review kit unboxing. These contained 1800X, Gigabyte Aorus GA-AX370-Gaming 5, Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 PC4-24000C15 3000MHz (v5.30 Hynix), Noctua NH-U12S SE-AM4 Cooler.

how do these channels get these goodies with such low you tube channel counts ?

 

[Mtom]

specualtion much the 7700k is still going to be quicker than most of you mention yet with no knowledge the new stuff is quicker lol.amd pulled a blinder here they got people buying on speculation with no benchmarks.i can tell you now when the actual benchmarks hit and people see chips like 7700k still ahead and with price reductions its going to make fun reading.

i love that amd have a decent range of cpus coming but just dont jump in double footed just yet.

I did not say they will be faster than the 7700k, but even if they just bring IPC between Haswell and Skylake imho its just not worth to buy the 7700k. Its not 1.5 times faster, more like just a few percent, but it is 1.5 times more expensive.

 

[Frozennova]

I did not say they will be faster than the 7700k, but even if they just bring IPC between Haswell and Skylake imho its just not worth to buy the 7700k. Its not 1.5 times faster, more like just a few percent, but it is 1.5 times more expensive.

Only it isn't 1.5x the price, a 7700k is what, £50 more expensive than a 1700 and the same price as a 1700x

 

[harney]

Our thoughts are with Gibbo at this time..

 

[Drollic]

specualtion much the 7700k is still going to be quicker than most of you mention yet with no knowledge the new stuff is quicker lol.amd pulled a blinder here they got people buying on speculation with no benchmarks.i can tell you now when the actual benchmarks hit and people see chips like 7700k still ahead and with price reductions its going to make fun reading.

i love that amd have a decent range of cpus coming but just dont jump in double footed just yet.

You have to remember that most people are shelling out £800+ for near full systems. A lot of those people probably couldn't care less if there is a slight lead in most games being on clocked i7s as longer term, it's very likely the r7s will hold a big advantage. Then you have to consider the other uses outside gaming where again the r7 is in a different league. Coming from a 3770k at 4.3, I personally wouldn't buy a 7700k even if it cost £250. The gains just aren't worth the upgrade cost when you consider these r7s and coffee lake 6 core around 10 months away at what should now be reduced cost. The last few months have been a terrible time for full system upgrades.

 

[KrisWragg]

Was just looking at my emails for when I bought my current system, my 2500k cost £165 (currently OC'd to 4.5Ghz), the Z68 mobo cost £125 and 8GB DDR3 1600mhz cost £35. That was in November 2011...

Currently eyeing up a 1700X with Asrock Taichi and 32GB DDR4 for roughly £800 compared with £325 for my previous machine... I can't help but think it's going to cost me over twice as much and probably won't last 6 years like my current machine!

 

[TNA]

haha this just made me spit my tea out in laughter... now goes to look for a new pc monitor...

 

[Techen]

I keep seeing this. When you say we might see gaming benchmarks where the '7700K is ahead', what exactly are you expecting? 1,2,3,4 or 5 fps more? 90fps instead of 87 fps for the Ryzens?

Realistically, this is what we are talking about here, as 99.99% of gamers don't have a Titan X to expose the CPU as any kind of bottleneck and don't play at 720p. So you are talking about absolutely negligible and inconsequential 'leads' in average fps for the 7700K, if any.

I mean look:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10968...w-review-the-new-stock-performance-champion/8

This is the normal set-up for 'gamers' with a card on the level of a GTX 980 or 390X and as you can see, the 7700K's 'lead' over a 2600K is under FIVE fps. So I don't understand how people are expecting the 7700K to have anything other than an utterly inconsequential performance edge over the Ryzen's in normal set-ups.

Ey someone sees the light. Gpus do all the work in gaming, i might loose 5fps from my intel going to ryzen but what happens when games like ashes that support 8 cores come out. Then what

 

[loxocemus]

Only it isn't 1.5x the price, a 7700k is what, £50 more expensive than a 1700 and the same price as a 1700x

7700k 329.99 1700x 389.99

 

[Hotwired]

Ey someone sees the light. Gpus do all the work in gaming, i might loose 5fps from my intel going to ryzen but what happens when games like ashes that support 8 cores. Then what

Not completely true.

Single player it usually is the GPU but start stacking up the players in multiplayer and the CPU can become more important.

Problem is that kind of benchmark is not common.

 

[Bonjour]

It's the minimum framerates that are key for me. Keep the sustained minimum's above 40FPS and I'm happy.

 

[Techen]

Not completely true.

Single player it usually is the GPU but start stacking up the players in multiplayer and the CPU can become more important.

Problem is that kind of benchmark is not common.

Thats also not entirely true. Its not players that stress the cpu too much thats networking. Its AI hence Ashes does do well with more cores.

 

[Clarkson]

So it's all very exciting and I get a little upgrade itch like anyone else, but realistically is there any point for me?
I see all these % increases and improvments over X/Y/Z generation or comparitive chips, but even with my old 2500K @ 4.5GHz will I ACTUALLY notice any real difference? The most tasking thing I'd do is gaming, and currently at 3440x1440 with a GTX 1070 and aforementioned CPU I don't have any problems with The Witcher 3 at the moment. Admittedly I haven't even checked frame rate since owning my x34a but what's the point if I don't notice any problems..

Seems people get carried away with academic results (Each to their own might I add)

Not sure what point I'm trying to make but whereas the 1070 was a big upgrade over my pathetic 6970, even an old 2500K doesn't strike me as being problematic in real life application.