• 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) ***

Perfectly happy with my choice - its exactly where I thought it would be. Loses a bit on low/older games, good for high threadcount/virtualization/simulations - 1/2 the price of the competition with optimizations to come on memory/bios/smt etc.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
AMDs version of hyperthreading.




Sure but it's still getting great reviews even with self inflicted below par gaming performance. First thing I will be doing is disabling SMT on the 1600 if it's not fixed by then.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying - but AMD should have seen that and said for reviewers to bench gaming without SMT in the first place.

I suspect many of the worst gaming results are with SMT on. Plus the whole debacle with the rushed motherboards,etc. The whole point its "another few months and performance will be fixed" scenario.

Many of us enthusiasts might give AMD a bit more leeway,but the average Joe won't and will dismiss Ryzen as a whole for gaming anyway even if things are fixed.

Yes,AMD will do far better with this range in general CPU sales,but the problem is they will also being loosing sales to Intel.

Its the R9 290X again.
 
Toss3 said:
MunKn62CRwenz9EWvEcm9X-650-80.png


SMT definitely causing AMD to lose FPS in games. Lower latency RAM also seems to help a lot.
Click to expand...
That's more like it. Hopefully this can be fixed (I assume Microsoft hasn't patched any Windows versions for AMD's SMT implementation yet) and it also indicates that the 4 core and 6 core version will be fantastic bang-for-buck compared to Intel (tiny loss in gaming performance, way cheaper, and better general productivity). Hell, if the 4 core and 6 core versions clock slightly higher they'll probably be on par in some games.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
I get what you are saying - but AMD should have seen that and said for reviewers to bench gaming without SMT on in the first place.

I suspect many of the worst gaming results are with SMT on. Plus the whole debacle with the rushed motherboards,etc. The whole point its "another few months and performance will be fixed" scenario.

Many of use enthusiasts might give AMD a bit more leeway,but the average Joe won't and will dismiss Ryzen as a whole for gaming anyway even if things are fixed.

Yes,AMD will do far better with this range in general CPU sales,but the problem is they will also being loosing sales to Intel.
Click to expand...

You sound like you've changed your tune since yesterday. I wonder if drunken master still thinks I'm 'utterly' wrong :D

Where's my apology? :o
 
Hopefully the queue now gets a little shorter and I can now order one in a sensible time period.

I still think that it is a good option. A bit fresh with development to improve it.
 

Just watched TTL's 1800x review and while it still is a CPU that is fantastic bang for buck, very impressed with what AMD have achieved. I couldn't help but feel somewhat disappointed.

Put the CPU at stock and load all cores up and it would sit at 3.5-3.6ghz. Overclocked it would sit at 3.9. Couldn't get it any further than 4ghz with the temps mid-high 80's with a h110 gt (fans at full blast).
 
harney said:
be gone with you get out of this thread :p :)

If i was you and not in a real rush wait a while see how things settle re memory / bios and this SMT thing
Click to expand...

I had time booked off, as rebuilding PC is not something I generally have time for - hence why nothing has changed in it in about 2 years.

I tend to jsut want to use my PC these days rather than fiddle...

Haven't done it yet, but...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom