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

[ubersonic]

However I bet it won't be long before a hacker changes this - no matter what MS try to do, the OS Kernal is x64 bit universal - you can't make a processor that runs a 40 year old code base immune to all code thats based on x64/x86

I believe it would just require tricking Windows Update into thinking that the system has a different CPU/chipset. The issue is that due to WU being an app in NT6 and not a website like in 9x/NT5 that would require tricking the O/S too, which could cause issues.

The issue is putting in code to disable updates for older OS if they use new hardware.

So it's not "it wont work" it's we're gonna check the hardware and if we we don't like it we disable updates.

That's not lack of support that's deliberate blocking.

The thing is though, I can kinda see where MS are coming from here, Windows 7 is an obsolete O/S, it's only getting updates because Microsoft chose to extend support for customers who's hardware couldn't be updated. So while this sucks for people who fear change/advancements it is understandable as anyone installing 7 on a new machine and trying to use Windows update is taking liberties a bit. I don't whine that my retro Windows 98 machine hasn't been able to access WU in a decade...

Having said that Windows 8 has mainstream support for 10 more months so they have no excuse there lol.

*EDIT*

It turns out that while existing Windows 8 systems have support until Jan 18, support for new installations/builds ceased in Oct 16. So legally MS are clear there.

 

[melmac]

Most boards are having issues running memory higher than 2667 currently I think.

Regarding the Asus x370 pro, issues currently face otherwise : no idle downclock when Oc, didn't like one of my USB 3 hubs, numlock won't stay enabled at start.

Apart from that, seems solid enough. Easily pushes a 1700 to 4ghz.

Thanks, just as an aside, what USB 3.0 chipset does it have?

It's always better to just get the highest rated memory you can afford, more importantly buy QVL approved RAM for your chosen mobo. Many on AM4 platform now are still struggling to run their memory at its rated frequency let alone overclocking it. My Vengeance LPX 3000 CL15 isn't on the approved list but I've been lucky enough to be able to run it at 2933 with a bit of voltage tweaking. RAM is everything it seems with these new Rysen chips.

Thanks again Steve. I will get the best Ram I can afford and hope that BIOS updates will sort these small issues out.

 

[zoomee]

Think I'll hang fire for now before diving in - hopefully should give AMD and Asus etc time to resolve the issues with BIOS / scheduling software etc etc

 

[pete910]

Really like the look of the Gigabyte AM4s. Waiting to hear how they shape up..

I will post mine when it arrives

 

[teppic]

It seems that it's not actually the ram speed that is beneficial but the fact that communication in the CPU between the two CCXs is set to the same as the base clock speed of the RAM. I wonder if boards will be able to have some kind of ratio so you can increase this speed without having faster RAM.

 

[DragonQ]

It seems that it's not actually the ram speed that is beneficial but the fact that communication in the CPU between the two CCXs is set to the same as the base clock speed of the RAM. I wonder if boards will be able to have some kind of ratio so you can increase this speed without having faster RAM.

It's a 1:2 fixed ratio. Increasing RAM speed by 20% would increase the link speed between the CCXs by 10%. This obviously won't yield a 10% improvement in general performance but in the worst cases it could be significant.

 

[Scramz]

OC power reviews I've seen are saying up to 250W for whole system benchmarking. @Scramz posted some power figures as well earlier.

Sorry, I should've been more specific. I'm more interested in idle power consumption since 90% of the time the machine is just serving files and not doing much. Backups and parity calculations are probably the most it usually has to do.

Here you go sir.

For anyone who would be interested in the power usage of a Ryzen system here are my results (PC unit only):

System and connected peripherals:
1700 @ 3.6Ghz (All cores) on 1.112volts
MSI B350 Tomahawk
16GB Crucial 2400Mhz RAM (2x8)
Crucial MX300 750GB SSD
3TB WD Red HDD
EVGA FTW 1070 8GB
Sennheiser PC 363D headset
Corsair K65 RGB Keyboard
Logitech G303

Pushing a 3440x1440 monitor

Spoiler: PC in standby mode – Average 1.9watts

Spoiler: PC Posting – Average 124watts

Spoiler: Idle system with screen awake – Average 56.6watts

Spoiler: Real bench running H264 Video Encoding – Average 149.7watts

Spoiler: Gaming playing Squad at 3440x1440 on epic GFX – Average 225.5watts - Peaked 240watts

I am very impressed considering it's a 8C16T monster!!!

To put it into perspective, my Ryzen system is on 24/7 with sleep mode off running VM's and different types of workloads. I pay 12.5p per KW and in 4ish days it has use 69p worth of electric but that is not only the machine on the metre, that including my 3440x1440 monitor @ 100Hz, a lamp and a charging Ipad/Iphone.

If I was to idle at 60w for 720 hours (Month 24/7) it would cost about £5. A none 24/7 system would be even cheaper.

 

[Scramz]

So it seems people have been testing youtube 8K Videos with 7700k's and Ryzen's.

My 1700 @ 3.6Ghz sits between 35-50% usage when playing and the playback it silky smooth. Lots of reports that the 4C8T i7's really struggling with this...

I have 300MB down so buffering it not really an issue for me but if less than 100MB its takes time to load.

 

[LtMatt]

So it seems people have been testing youtube 8K Videos with 7700k's and Ryzen's.

My 1700 @ 3.6Ghz sits between 35-50% usage when playing and the playback it silky smooth. Lots of reports that the 4C8T i7's really struggling with this...

I have 300MB down so buffering it not really an issue for me but if less than 100MB its takes time to load.

I'll give it a butchers, but 30MB download might take me several days to buffer it.

 

[peahead]

^^^Just tested that video myself with my 6600k it wont play it without stuttering Ryzen is calling

 

[LtMatt]

I'll give it a butchers, but 30MB download might take me several days to buffer it.

I was able to test it for around 20 seconds, as that's all YouTube would buffer ahead, but it was buttery smooth and CPU usage was around 20-40% over most of the threads.

 

[Scramz]

^^^Just tested that video myself with my 6600k it wont play it without stuttering Ryzen is calling

I was able to test it for around 20 seconds, as that's all YouTube would buffer ahead, but it was buttery smooth and CPU usage was around 20-40% over most of the threads.

8 core is the way forward!!!!

EDIT: And 16 Threads!

 

[Curlyriff]

So it seems people have been testing youtube 8K Videos with 7700k's and Ryzen's.

My 1700 @ 3.6Ghz sits between 35-50% usage when playing and the playback it silky smooth. Lots of reports that the 4C8T i7's really struggling with this...

I have 300MB down so buffering it not really an issue for me but if less than 100MB its takes time to load.

No problem to download but with my CPU (4970k) it is utilising 90% during playback although seems pretty smooth to my eyes. On another note, although of course it compressed on YouTube with a 4k monitor it looks really good.

 

[AthlonXP1800]

So it seems people have been testing youtube 8K Videos with 7700k's and Ryzen's.

My 1700 @ 3.6Ghz sits between 35-50% usage when playing and the playback it silky smooth. Lots of reports that the 4C8T i7's really struggling with this...

I have 300MB down so buffering it not really an issue for me but if less than 100MB its takes time to load.

I tried it with Chrome, it cant handle 8K so I closed Chrome and opened Edge. Very surprised to see Edge can handle 8K perfect very smoothly with no dropped frames at 14% CPU load.

That would explained why Netflix recommended Edge browser for 4K HDR.

 

[RavenXXX2]

I get 10% usage on my G4560.

 

[CEUOTC]

DSR'd to +8k looks stunning and no dropped frames, R7 1700 @ stock

 

[shankly1985]

So it seems people have been testing youtube 8K Videos with 7700k's and Ryzen's.

My 1700 @ 3.6Ghz sits between 35-50% usage when playing and the playback it silky smooth. Lots of reports that the 4C8T i7's really struggling with this...

I have 300MB down so buffering it not really an issue for me but if less than 100MB its takes time to load.

i7 3770k @4.2 Stutter

 

[opethdisciple]

I tried it with Chrome, it cant handle 8K so I closed Chrome and opened Edge. Very surprised to see Edge can handle 8K perfect very smoothly with no dropped frames at 14% CPU load.

That would explained why Netflix recommended Edge browser for 4K HDR.

Not desputing your observations. It's just odd as YouTube is owned by Google so should handle fine in Chrome.

Saying that I noticed some issues with YouTube yesterday in chrome. So it might be some bug in current Chrome 57.

 

[shankly1985]

Please note here guys if you have GPU acceleration turned off your CPU will be doing the work, Acceleration Turn on the GPU will do the work.

 

[muon]

As long as you have a GPU with HEVC acceleration support the CPU pretty much doesn't matter.

Kabylake also has HEVC acceleration doesn't it?

edit:

Looks like youtube uses vp9 codec for 4k video and above. So same applies but replace with VP9.