• 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) ***

Silent_Scone said:
They do if you understand the context, but not for this platform yet. :)

You have a custom loop on a BWE system, I'd expect you would have experienced how better cooling can aid overclocking. (Lovely build btw)
Click to expand...


Yes, custom loops as I mentioned are a league unto their own. You'll absolutely see better performance with that kind of set up, even with a single 360 rad. I'm talking about AIOs, not custom loops, vs air coolers.
 
Well, already ordered 32gb of 2400 ddr4 so guess I have made up my mind and will get a 1700 and an Asus prime pro.

And with luck the only thing I may change in next few years is upgrade cpu to one of the future ryzens and get Nvme ssd when 1tb is needed by me.

Oh, and a gpu upgrade some time down the line.

Came close to ordering 6800k little while back, but glad waited.
 
Bonjour said:
*Eyes the emergency break lever on the hype train*
Click to expand...

You know that's just for show, right? It used to connect to something, but these days we just let Silent Scone pull on it for fun. No stops till the 1st of March now.

humbug said:
Its starting to sound like these things don't really overclock at all, unless on Asus Crosshair or similar £250+ boards and even then only by about 5%, make you wonder why they are even unlocked, its a starting to look like yet another AMD gone wrong somewhere major, they should have saved themselves yet another label of that sort and humiliation and just locked them all, for now.
Click to expand...

So much evaluation based on overclocking. Yes, I know the name of the forum but I still don't get people who think a CPU line is awful if it doesn't overclock by whopping amounts. Overclocking came about back in the day because chip quality was so irregular that Intel and AMD had to be very conservative with what they clocked their chips officially and there was a lot of opportunity to get lucky and crank up the speed by 25%. These days half the time it's marketing with Intel charging you extra just to crank the speed up to where they know it can reach, anyway. Chip makers are able to get near the potential of the chip more consistently now. I get the impression some people are happier if chip makers deliberately underclock chips just so that they can feel they've got a bargain. It's a brand new architecture with apparently excellent IPC and 8c/16t. I thought it would come in around 3.3GHz. We should all be blown away it's doing 4GHz, imo. Not saying things like "AMD gone wrong somewhere major". I recall you were like this with Polaris as well - another chip that did what it set out to achieve and at a competitive price but before it came out you were hyping it up to ridiculous levels and then angry and disappointed afterwards.

Everything we are seeing (bar some reports of slight shakiness in the lower-tier chipset) is suggesting Ryzen is a triumph. But it's not going to butter your scones for you.
 
I haven't been following Ryzen for long as forgive me for not reading the previous 451 pages but what is the point of the 1700? The i7 7700 is a tenner more but appears to have better single threaded performance, all I keep seeing is cinebench results being banded around because of the multicore performance but games will not be written to take advantage of 8 does let alone 16 threads.
 
PiKe said:
I haven't been following Ryzen for long as forgive me for not reading the previous 451 pages but what is the point of the 1700? The i7 7700 is a tenner more but appears to have better single threaded performance, all I keep seeing is cinebench results being banded around because of the multicore performance but games will not be written to take advantage of 8 does let alone 16 threads.
Click to expand...

Dx12 and vulkan are geared to take advantage of more cores.......
 
PiKe said:
I haven't been following Ryzen for long as forgive me for not reading the previous 451 pages but what is the point of the 1700? The i7 7700 is a tenner more but appears to have better single threaded performance, all I keep seeing is cinebench results being banded around because of the multicore performance but games will not be written to take advantage of 8 does let alone 16 threads.
Click to expand...

https://translate.google.co.uk/tran.../cpu-skalierung-kerne-spiele-test/&edit-text=
 
PiKe said:
I haven't been following Ryzen for long as forgive me for not reading the previous 451 pages but what is the point of the 1700? The i7 7700 is a tenner more but appears to have better single threaded performance, all I keep seeing is cinebench results being banded around because of the multicore performance but games will not be written to take advantage of 8 does let alone 16 threads.
Click to expand...

Some people do more than game.
 
h4rm0ny said:
You know that's just for show, right? It used to connect to something, but these days we just let Silent Scone pull on it for fun. No stops till the 1st of March now.



So much evaluation based on overclocking. Yes, I know the name of the forum but I still don't get people who think a CPU line is awful if it doesn't overclock by whopping amounts. Overclocking came about back in the day because chip quality was so irregular that Intel and AMD had to be very conservative with what they clocked their chips officially and there was a lot of opportunity to get lucky and crank up the speed by 25%. These days half the time it's marketing with Intel charging you extra just to crank the speed up to where they know it can reach, anyway. Chip makers are able to get near the potential of the chip more consistently now. I get the impression some people are happier if chip makers deliberately underclock chips just so that they can feel they've got a bargain. It's a brand new architecture with apparently excellent IPC and 8c/16t. I thought it would come in around 3.3GHz. We should all be blown away it's doing 4GHz, imo. Not saying things like "AMD gone wrong somewhere major". I recall you were like this with Polaris as well - another chip that did what it set out to achieve and at a competitive price but before it came out you were hyping it up to ridiculous levels and then angry and disappointed afterwards.

Everything we are seeing (bar some reports of slight shakiness in the lower-tier chipset) is suggesting Ryzen is a triumph. But it's not going to butter your scones for you.
Click to expand...

My Disappointment with Polaris had nothing to do with overclocking, its the fact that its the third GPU from AMD which sits in the same price and performance bracket, actually the 390X is faster.

I had assumed after some years that AMD had made a competitive GPU again, turned out they actually slipped backwards.
 
PiKe said:
I haven't been following Ryzen for long as forgive me for not reading the previous 451 pages but what is the point of the 1700? The i7 7700 is a tenner more but appears to have better single threaded performance, all I keep seeing is cinebench results being banded around because of the multicore performance but games will not be written to take advantage of 8 does let alone 16 threads.
Click to expand...

In actual gaming practice, there wont be any perceived difference but anything else you may do, editing,streaming, utube etc..then more cores helps as AMD Ryzen allows you to build a powerful gaming and everything else PC for a unprecedented price performance ratio. Its why I await the 6c/12t version as it be perfect for my gaming and usage.
 
flopper said:
In actual gaming practice, there wont be any perceived difference but anything else you may do, editing,streaming, utube etc..then more cores helps as AMD Ryzen allows you to build a powerful gaming and everything else PC for a unprecedented price performance ratio. Its why I await the 6c/12t version as it be perfect for my gaming and usage.
Click to expand...

Better just get the 8c 16t before the pound does down even more and you end up paying the same as a 1700 is on release day for that 6 core one :D
 
humbug said:
My Disappointment with Polaris had nothing to do with overclocking, its the fact that its the third GPU from AMD which sits in the same price and performance bracket, actually the 390X is faster.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that your reaction to Polaris was due to overclocking, just that you were - against what many of us kept telling you - expecting it to be much more powerful than it was. And then when it turned out to be what AMD consistently portrayed it as (an efficient and capable mid-range card at a lower price point), you railed against it. You got tripped up by your own expectations that people had kept trying to save you from all along. AMD's high-end cards are Vega and are yet to come.

humbug said:
I had assumed after some years that AMD had made a competitive GPU again, turned out they actually slipped backwards.
Click to expand...

Well I wont derail this thread by debating that here. Suffice to say I strongly disagree and if you do it to yourself all over again with Zen, don't say we didn't try.

RyZen seems to be an excellent chip - much better than most of us hoped a year ago. My own predictions were low 3GHz to 3.5GHz clocks and my chief worry was a poor IMC. Seems I was wrong on the clock speeds and I'm reserving judgement on memory performance till I see real reviews. (Though cautiously pleased to see Gibbo claiming capability up to 3200).
 
Lokken86 said:
Better just get the 8c 16t before the pound does down even more and you end up paying the same as a 1700 is on release day for that 6 core one :D
Click to expand...

I debated 8 or 6 but for my needs a 6 core fits perfectly.
I can wait and the cost wont be a factor at those price ranges.
Getting a Vega card along the way so have to fit the budget to
 
PiKe said:
I haven't been following Ryzen for long as forgive me for not reading the previous 451 pages but what is the point of the 1700? The i7 7700 is a tenner more but appears to have better single threaded performance, all I keep seeing is cinebench results being banded around because of the multicore performance but games will not be written to take advantage of 8 does let alone 16 threads.
Click to expand...

There is really very little out there (that many people will use) that will still only use a single thread though. And what is out there, it looks to be marginal difference. I'd imagine most people do some sort of multi-tasking with their computers. Even gamers surely? And going forward, I expect most games to be built utilising more cores. We are already seeing it now. When I play GTAV (well every game really) on my 4770k I have HWMonitor on another screen so I can see how my system is coping on ultra settings. I noticed that it's the actual cores that take the punishment, not the threads. So even in a game that's a couple years old now, multi-core matter. And it's not going to go backwards in the future is it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom