• 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) ***

gavinh87 said:
They may well not be. But thats not to say it will perform any worse than intel does in that same scenario. I've never played fallout or skyrim but I'd imagine it would affect CPU's all the same, not just one.
Click to expand...

I agree with cat ..fallout 4 is a very strange engine..not good for benchmarks you can have low gpu usage and low cpu usage yet it will dip badly no mater what you do even run at 720p it still tanks bad code i guess
 
N19h7m4r3 said:
I haven't played a single Bethesda game since Morrowind really. I might one day, but I bought FO3 and it refused to even run on Windows 10, never tried again.

Also Computerbase are including frametimes now for their CPU benches.
Multiplayer BF1 is looking darn good on Ryzen.

Bloody hell, I hope AMD can sort out their Gaming performance issues! It's the only thing holding this launch back!

5dc3506cb2874c8ea23ced0bdd278a47.png
Click to expand...

Now that is what i want to see.... would you look at that :) now i would like to see the Intel 8 core results
 
humbug said:
Higher frame rates for smoother gameplay, but what if you have smoother gameplay with lower FPS?


*heads are about to explode* :D
Click to expand...

Mine has all ready exploded as soon as i started hearing a trend with the reviews stating they thought things where smoother with Ryzen ......So it does look like its taken the Ryzen release to show us how bad ..maybe a bit strong there ..to show us what weaknesses Intel chips may have ....the fault is really been no competition so Intel have just been drip feeding it and not really improving things they way they really could have been if AMD had still been in the game ...
 
Scramz said:
1700 - 10 mins runs with Realbench stress test temps with Noctua NH-U12S


u2yHdK2.png

R7oHjJE.png

kUTe53l.png

NpqVQa9.png


These chips are getting more and more impressive.

What do you people think I should sit on for 24/7?
Click to expand...

Very impressed with your results Scramz and thanks for your time on this and sharing your results we all appreciate it ..
 
Scramz said:
1700 - 10 mins runs with Realbench stress test temps with Noctua NH-U12S


u2yHdK2.png

R7oHjJE.png

kUTe53l.png

NpqVQa9.png


These chips are getting more and more impressive.

What do you people think I should sit on for 24/7?
Click to expand...

Have you got any idea of the power consumption for those clocks and voltages?
Even if you don't have a mains power meter, I believe HWiNFO64 can read the package power which should give a relative idea (minus VRM and PSU inefficiencies).
With the software overclocking utilities like AMD Ryzen Master Utility and the ability to change profiles without restarting, I would be tempted to create various different ones like a extra low power one like your 3.6GHz and a high power profile like your 3.9GHz one.
 
harney said:
Mine has all ready exploded as soon as i started hearing a trend with the reviews stating they thought things where smoother with Ryzen ......So it does look like its taken the Ryzen release to show us how bad ..maybe a bit strong there ..to show us what weaknesses Intel chips may have ....the fault is really been no competition so Intel have just been drip feeding it and not really improving things they way they really could have been if AMD had still been in the game ...
Click to expand...
To be fair to Intel, that Computerbase article also shows that's it's only the mainstream CPUs which have this stuttering in Battlefield multiplayer. The Intel HEDT CPUs like i7-6850K performs only a little worse than the Ryzen 7 1800X
zKbc7wk.png
And the DX12 multiplayer results for Intel HEDT and the i7-7700K are actually a bit better than Ryzen's.
Unsure if it makes any real difference in gaming, but I guess that's why reason Intel were able to get big spender to buy HEDT for multi-GPU setups.
 
KompuKare said:
Have you got any idea of the power consumption for those clocks and voltages?
Even if you don't have a mains power meter, I believe HWiNFO64 can read the package power which should give a relative idea (minus VRM and PSU inefficiencies).
With the software overclocking utilities like AMD Ryzen Master Utility and the ability to change profiles without restarting, I would be tempted to create various different ones like a extra low power one like your 3.6GHz and a high power profile like your 3.9GHz one.
Click to expand...
Because my last post was somehow lost... is here someone who already used this AMD Master Tool to OC? If so do you recommend it? :)
 
Seem to be getting similar results to Scramz, at least to 3.7GHz. Not gone any further yet. Stock volts of 1.1875, max temp 55.5c. Be interesting to see what temps are once the Noctua mount has come. Not convinced my Thermalright heatsink is making proper contact.
 
So it seems that the theme of people bricking their CH6 boards are that they are installing EZ update from the supplied disk with mobo. App is trying to auto uopdate bios via windows and failing resulting in bricked boards......quite a few judging from the comments. Just a heads up for anyone that has that board.
 
Scramz said:
Use it, its very good.
Click to expand...
Great News for me :) so i dont have to mess around in BIOS/UEFI... I'm totally new to OCing but got somehow excited about it and since I planned to do a completely new build this was a big thing for me hehe.
Do you also suggesting to go with the 1700 and try to get 4 GHz. Some guys in a shop told me that the 1800x should be best to OC but all this forum says otherwise... I'm a bit confused right now lol.
 
I need to ask this because I cant find the answer and its confusing me

Is a non X Ryzen when OC'd to match an X model across all cores and is an X models quoted turbo speed guaranteed and across all cores or is it just single core above base clocks?

Thanks
 
Relentless81 said:
I need to ask this because I cant find the answer and its confusing me

Is a non X Ryzen when OC'd to match an X model across all cores and is an X models quoted turbo speed guaranteed and across all cores or is it just single core above base clocks?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Boost is single core, non X matches X models when running at the same frequency.

Basically unless you don't want to overclock the 1700 is the only one to buy
 
Is there a way to get Ryzen Master to apply a saved profile on startup? Seems like it has to be manually applied.
 
SilverShark said:
Great News for me :) so i dont have to mess around in BIOS/UEFI... I'm totally new to OCing but got somehow excited about it and since I planned to do a completely new build this was a big thing for me hehe.
Do you also suggesting to go with the 1700 and try to get 4 GHz. Some guys in a shop told me that the 1800x should be best to OC but all this forum says otherwise... I'm a bit confused right now lol.
Click to expand...

From what we have seen you will gain nothing by going for the 1800x over the 1700 as they all seem to clock the same, the 1700 is the one to go for at this time, for higher clocks wait for later revisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom