Really curious about the R3/R5. Looking at the current pricing of R7 it would indicate that R5 6/12 should be around £259 and 4/8 could be as low as £200 so if the IPC performance stays the same then you're basically getting a 6700k performance for £200 or less. Wondering how Intel will respond to this with pricing - that's i5 region so if the CPU comes within 5-10% gaming performance and destroys it in everything else, I think we have another winner.
-
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) ***
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
The only thing Intel have going for them is the fact the 7700k runs at a turbo of 4.5ghz out the box, with room to go up to 4.8-5.0Ghz, the R5 4c/8t cpu unfortunately won't reach anywhere near that clock speed so will still be slower, but as you say it might be prices nearly £150 cheaper!
And that is the thing. If you can get 90% the performance for half the price (bearing in mind most games don't notice the 4.5 to 5.0Ghz overclock bar a frame or two) then being able to get close to the 4.5GHz level is what Ryzen would be best to get too.
I can't see Intel suddenly putting out 6GHz chips or anything to damage what Ryzen will do with the R5. I don't think the R5 will get to 4.5GHz either but Ryzen+ may well do in a year and Intel need a few years looking at current roadmap to come back from current design principles.
Where have you seen that mentioned?
Realistically can't see it happening for the desktop, as the tradeoff between clockspeed in order to keep thermals under control will be too much for most desktop use.
I have not heard, seen, read or anything else in regards to Ryzen R9 and don't believe there is anything on it at all in regards to a 12 core chip or anything under an R9 family. I still wish they had sold them as R4, R6 & R8 chips to count the cores and then also be 1 number higher than that of the I-series from Intel which would also make it feel like at each level they are a step up. The double positive and reinforcement to what they are to me just seems like it was such a missed opportunity to have one over Intel.
Seems the MSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium motherboards are using cheap Nikos mosfets, same ones they used on their £80 AM3 lineup motherboards.5x msi titanium in stock
SourceNighthog at overclock.net said:Thanks for the rough calculation there Artikbot and AlphaC for more detail. Just haven't had the time to set myself into learning to be doing the calculations and the data yet.
Much appreciated.
And The MSI Titanium.. Are those NIKOS I read?
Highside 1 x NIKOS PK616BA (GUF0S3101)
Lowside 2 x NIKOS PK632BA (VUF2S1P03)
Same for CPU and SOC, SOC only gets 1 of each though.
I really didn't think they would be NIKOS on their best board.
This VRM has the same parts as their AM3+ boards. 970A Gaming And 990FXA Gaming. though those had 2x of both.
And I might mention those are practically half the price.
AlphaC at overclock.net said:That's laughable...
it shouldn't be named Xpower and shouldn't cost $300 USD MSRP. It's using sub $150 board circuitry ....
No Base clock gen.
No tantalum caps
3 USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports (USB 3.1 Gen 1 = USB 3.0 speed)
No Sata express
NIKOS mosfets.
Come on MSI, what are you thinking!
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,296
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Wouldn't it logically be 10 core?
Yeah, I've seen this that's why decided not to get it. I like the looks but quality and features don't match the price tag. I'm only waiting for Asus CH6, even with all the issues it's quite capable board and no other brand has team so open, working with community to fix things.
Here's something to wet your beak. Vulkan using all those threads and cores.
We need more Id tech 6 games tbh. Imagine something like fallout running on it
We need more Id tech 6 games tbh. Imagine something like fallout running on it
You're in luck. http://www.pcgamer.com/bethesda-partners-with-amd-to-optimize-games-for-ryzen-and-vega/
I am not surprised since read the power layout on the spec weeks ago. Is overpriced and anyone would be better off to buy the Tomahawk than the Titanium!!!!!
And from what I saw regarding the Gigabyte K7, makes me happy for the choice of getting the X370 Taichi, even if is running late
(COME ON OCUK)
Can you kindly ask your bosses to request the sister company of Bethesda, Zenimax Online, to implement Vulcan on the TESO engine? It will be better than the DX12 they are planning, especially at Cyrodiil where the game tanks when few hundred people per side are trying to take over (or defend) a castle.
Making BF1 64 player game a doddle for even a dual core CPU. While TESO tanks 6c/12t 4930K @ 4.5Ghz!!!! Let alone 4820K @5Ghz.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2010
- Posts
- 618
- Location
- Telford, Shropshire
Guys for gaming purposes mostly, can anybody point me towards/give me an analysis of benefits to upgrading to a 1700 from my xeon 5660?
Apart from the obvious platform benefits, I'm running the 5660 at 4ghz.
I'd like to spend the £800 on a 1080ti, rather than upgrade the platform first.
Apart from the obvious platform benefits, I'm running the 5660 at 4ghz.
I'd like to spend the £800 on a 1080ti, rather than upgrade the platform first.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 9,332
- Location
- newcastle
What's wrong with the K7?I am not surprised since read the power layout on the spec weeks ago. Is overpriced and anyone would be better off to buy the Tomahawk than the Titanium!!!!!
And from what I saw regarding the Gigabyte K7, makes me happy for the choice of getting the X370 Taichi, even if is running late
To start 6+4 VRM only, of not that good quality also. They could easily be compared to the middle ground of the other mobos. The only added benefit over the K5 is the external BLK.
That leaves Asus Hero and the 2 Asrock X370s with enough power delivery to rely on, and possibly fully utilise the external BLK.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2014
- Posts
- 3,575
- Location
- Scotland
https://twitter.com/CPCHardware/status/840565557334286336
Look like AMD have problems with 4 cores Ryzen 5 1400 and 1300 CPUs yield. These Ryzen 5 CPUs cant clock higher than 3.2GHz. Ryzen 5 1400 or 1400X Turbo clock suppose to be 3.9GHz and 1300 Turbo clock suppose to be 3.5GHz.
If true then people dreaming to get these 4 cores Ryzen 5 CPUs and OC it to 4GHz can forget it. No chance to match i5 7600K and i7 7700K peformance.
Look like AMD have problems with 4 cores Ryzen 5 1400 and 1300 CPUs yield. These Ryzen 5 CPUs cant clock higher than 3.2GHz. Ryzen 5 1400 or 1400X Turbo clock suppose to be 3.9GHz and 1300 Turbo clock suppose to be 3.5GHz.
If true then people dreaming to get these 4 cores Ryzen 5 CPUs and OC it to 4GHz can forget it. No chance to match i5 7600K and i7 7700K peformance.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 11,633
- Location
- Northampton
Given that we're seeing plenty of 1700s do 1ghz over stock what make thing the 4 and 6core SKUs are going to struggle make that kind of overclock a reality, especially with a higher baseclock to start withhttps://twitter.com/CPCHardware/status/840565557334286336
Look like AMD have problems with 4 cores Ryzen 5 1400 and 1300 CPUs yield. These Ryzen 5 CPUs cant clock higher than 3.2GHz. Ryzen 5 1400 or 1400X Turbo clock suppose to be 3.9GHz and 1300 Turbo clock suppose to be 3.5GHz.
If true then people dreaming to get these 4 cores Ryzen 5 CPUs and OC it to 4GHz can forget it. No chance to match i5 7600K and i7 7700K peformance.