• 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) ***

N19h7m4r3 said:
Aye, but to the point that a 470 is beating a 1060 when on Ryzen? Let's not forget the 1060 6Gb goes against the 480 8GB; and the 1060 3GB vs 480 4GB on Intel.
Click to expand...

I haven't been following the GPU releases for a while as I would just get tempted to spend money on premature upgrade :) so I'm a bit of a noob to the differences between the cards but it has been interesting to see the benchmarks comparing DX12. It does seem to make sense that AMDs hardware based scheduler is able to feed data more efficiently to all the CPU cores vs NVidias software scheduler that works more efficiently with fewer higher clocked cores and doesn't scale so well with more CPU cores, being more dependant on the primary core. The video posted a bit earlier by @Harvey explains it well I think.
 
nkuk said:
I haven't been following the GPU releases for a while as I would just get tempted to spend money on premature upgrade :) so I'm a bit of a noob to the differences between the cards but it has been interesting to see the benchmarks comparing DX12. It does seem to make sense that AMDs hardware based scheduler is able to feed data more efficiently to all the CPU cores vs NVidias software scheduler that works more efficiently with fewer higher clocked cores and doesn't scale so well with more CPU cores, being more dependant on the primary core. The video posted a bit earlier by @Harvey explains it well I think.
Click to expand...

The problem is the lack of hardware on Nvidia.
 
R5 1400 + RX580 is going to be a very interesting combination for the budget enthusiast. Crossfire seems to be working much better than expected so the option of adding a second 580 later is definitely there followed by a Ryzen+ 12 months later.

It is tough because as the process improves and stocks build I expect that we will see very different performance - when the R5 launches I suspect we are going to be looking at almost exclusively failed R7 parts from a very early process. Give it 3 months of production and I suspect we will see the clocks improve on R5 from silicon available at launch.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
Looks like another 4Ghz wall or less, AMD let you overclock but is it even worth it.
Click to expand...

Look at it this way

For me 2 x 1700 non x running at stock.. when i did my tests both of them @ 2100 ram 16gb ram in each so out of the box 1st rev bios worse case tests.

up against 3 x i7's 7700 4790 & 4770 all overclocked 4.8 4.7 4.6 2 i7's with 32gb 1x 16gb with latest bios's running tip top

both 1700's give me over double the audio track count in DAW than all the i7's and still have room to spare

While using around a third of the power
and once the last i7 has sold.. its worked out its cost me nothing for the upgrade

Apart from DPC being a tad higher than Intels ..which i am sure this will be improved with bios updates all is good

So yes well worth it.



woppy101 said:
this is starting to remind me of Pentium D vs Athlon all over again.
Click to expand...

;)
 
He said he doesn't want to have AMD patches, this is not what they are trying to show? But surely Intel have had all their patches done, so why not add Ryzens? Biased?
 
Scramz said:
He said he doesn't want to have AMD patches, this is not what they are trying to show? But surely Intel have had all their patches done, so why not add Ryzens? Biased?
Click to expand...

Not enough games have been patched, so there would be no point in doing a comprehensive test on it. Nobody should choose their platform just on the results of the patching of one game. It better to wait and see what happens with a few titles, otherwise there isn't a large enough sample size to form a real conclusion from.
 
But if they are testing games where patches are available, surely they should use them...
 
Games have been optimised for Intel architecture for years now since AMD hasn't had any real market in gaming except at the low end. I imagine patching games often requires little more than recompiling them with different options. Some games might include a chunk of compiled code that Intel processors use and another chunk that AMD ones do -- a lot of multimedia apps do this kind of thing for different architectures to make the most of them.
 
HeX said:
But if they are testing games where patches are available, surely they should use them...
Click to expand...
Yeah. But the video was about testing the windows update uefi update and ram speed now vs when ryzen released so needed to use the same version of the game. Otherwise all he ends up testing is the game patch.
 
StarShock said:
Yeah. But the video was about testing the windows update uefi update and ram speed now vs when ryzen released so needed to use the same version of the game. Otherwise all he ends up testing is the game patch.
Click to expand...

Ah well that makes sense (haven't watched the video yet).
 
Beren said:
R5 1400 + RX580 is going to be a very interesting combination for the budget enthusiast. Crossfire seems to be working much better than expected so the option of adding a second 580 later is definitely there followed by a Ryzen+ 12 months later.

It is tough because as the process improves and stocks build I expect that we will see very different performance - when the R5 launches I suspect we are going to be looking at almost exclusively failed R7 parts from a very early process. Give it 3 months of production and I suspect we will see the clocks improve on R5 from silicon available at launch.
Click to expand...
Early indications are that RX 580s will be even pricier than RX 480s were at launch (partially due to weakening pound), whilst RX 480 prices have been dropping a lot recently. Not sure why anyone would go RX 580 just yet, especially when based on its rumoured clock speed bump it'll be less than 10% faster (plus you can just overclock a 480). Whether the RX 580 will have any advantage probably depends on if the clock ceiling is higher without pumping out a load more heat.
 
DragonQ said:
Early indications are that RX 580s will be even pricier than RX 480s were at launch (partially due to weakening pound), whilst RX 480 prices have been dropping a lot recently. Not sure why anyone would go RX 580 just yet, especially when based on its rumoured clock speed bump it'll be less than 10% faster (plus you can just overclock a 480). Whether the RX 580 will have any advantage probably depends on if the clock ceiling is higher without pumping out a load more heat.
Click to expand...

Too much speculation.

Even so, people will buy it because they're upgrading from 960s and the alternative is a 1060 which isn't a better card.

The 480s stock will be depleted, partly due to the amazing deals you mentioned, and 960 owner will easily pick a 580 over a refreshed 1060.
 
Last edited:
akarypid said:
Too much speculation.

Even so, people will buy it because they're upgrading from 960s and the alternative is a 1060 which isn't a better card.

The 480s stock will be depleted, partly due to the amazing deals you mentioned, and 960 owner will easily pick a 580 over a refreshed 1060.
Click to expand...
I think it's extremely unlikely that the RX 580 is going to be anything but an overclocked RX 480 at this point but you're right that the RX 480 will essentially disappear pretty soon leaving not much choice except in the used market.

RavenXXX2 said:
Click to expand...
Can't check the text review at work but what board are they actually using? Surely testing something like a UEFI update is entirely motherboard dependent? Also any mention of the nVidia DX12 performance issues manifesting themselves in every CPU-bottlenecked review?
 
Last edited:
Vish Petrol said:
Not enough games have been patched, so there would be no point in doing a comprehensive test on it. Nobody should choose their platform just on the results of the patching of one game. It better to wait and see what happens with a few titles, otherwise there isn't a large enough sample size to form a real conclusion from.
Click to expand...

Surely it would appeal to the people that play the games that has had a patch but are waiting on buying a Ryzen CPU?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom