Anyone switching from x99 -> Ryzen?

Silent_Scone · 23 Feb 2017 at 09:10

Burr said:
Like others have said really not much point in switching to Ryzen from X99. Good luck to AMD, bout time Intel took a licking. On a side point i do wonder what Intel will do with the 5820K/6800K since it looks like Ryzen effectively makes these CPU's redundant? That's redundant not obsolete. Anyone building a new system now though would be crazy to pick up a 6800K over a Ryzen R7.

Depends. 6800-6850K can out pace the 1700 quite easily in anything that isn't heavily multi-threaded, especially once overclocked. People need to lower their expectations a little.

Ryzen is stretched thin on the latter front already.

Bluntwrapped · 23 Feb 2017 at 09:11

Perfect_Chaos said:
Have the 6 core chips even been benchmarked? I thought only AMD's 8 core vs an Intel 6 core has been shown so far and there's not a massive difference in it, i don't think they are redundant yet simply because of that.

They're redundant at the current price.

~>Dg<~ · 23 Feb 2017 at 09:12

Bluntwrapped said:
Love the thought of Intel being shown up for the robbing greedy ******'s they are. I remember when an i5 cost £160 and the i7 was £230

well that is not really the case is it ?

as above someone pointed out a 5820k was available at low points of under £300 ! now many people have had 2 years of pcing for the same speed as what you are now going to get with the 1700 amd chip which is 320 quid ! brexit gouging and basically greed have forced them up and little competition.so actually its amd fault for taking so long and shops not intel.

as above posted when i brought my 5820k for eg the same bundle has gone up nearly 200 quid ! it would be priced at the same price as the 1700 bundle now with quad mem and a better mobo than what you will get with amd and i had it for best part of 1and half years.

so no intel hasnt been ripping people off.

Perfect_Chaos · 23 Feb 2017 at 09:22

Bluntwrapped said:
They're redundant at the current price.

If going by price only then i agree, i think i paid roughly 320 or 330 for my 5820k at the time. March 2 years ago. Ram was 155 for 32gb and Asus board was about 200. But everything has gone up really, including ram pricing.

An Exception · 23 Feb 2017 at 11:09

Silent_Scone said:
Depends. 6800-6850K can out pace the 1700 quite easily in anything that isn't heavily multi-threaded, especially once overclocked. People need to lower their expectations a little.

Ryzen is stretched thin on the latter front already.

From what I've seen, single threaded performance is basically the same clock for clock. But once anything begins to use multiple cores/hyper threading, the Ryzens pull away.
If an overclocked 1800x really beats an overclocked 6950x, that is simply INSANE!

An Exception · 23 Feb 2017 at 11:19

~>Dg<~ said:
well that is not really the case is it ?

as above someone pointed out a 5820k was available at low points of under £300 ! now many people have had 2 years of pcing for the same speed as what you are now going to get with the 1700 amd chip which is 320 quid ! brexit gouging and basically greed have forced them up and little competition.so actually its amd fault for taking so long and shops not intel.

as above posted when i brought my 5820k for eg the same bundle has gone up nearly 200 quid ! it would be priced at the same price as the 1700 bundle now with quad mem and a better mobo than what you will get with amd and i had it for best part of 1and half years.

so no intel hasnt been ripping people off.

If you look at the price of the 6900k & 6950x especially.. YES Intel has been shamelessly ripping people off. Why? Because they could.

Bluntwrapped · 23 Feb 2017 at 11:20

~>Dg<~ said:
well that is not really the case is it ?

as above someone pointed out a 5820k was available at low points of under £300 ! now many people have had 2 years of pcing for the same speed as what you are now going to get with the 1700 amd chip which is 320 quid ! brexit gouging and basically greed have forced them up and little competition.so actually its amd fault for taking so long and shops not intel.

as above posted when i brought my 5820k for eg the same bundle has gone up nearly 200 quid ! it would be priced at the same price as the 1700 bundle now with quad mem and a better mobo than what you will get with amd and i had it for best part of 1and half years.

so no intel hasnt been ripping people off.

Lol that's like saying Nvidia aren't ripping people off because you can buy a used GTX 980 for a decent price.

Of course Intel are at 'it'.

Their 30% profit to the tune of $1.25bn dollars in 2016 over 2015 tells you everything you need to know.

Don't pretend Intel are good guys, they've had the monopoly on the market for years now.

Silent_Scone · 23 Feb 2017 at 11:42

An Exception said:
From what I've seen, single threaded performance is basically the same clock for clock. But once anything begins to use multiple cores/hyper threading, the Ryzens pull away.
If an overclocked 1800x really beats an overclocked 6950x, that is simply INSANE!

Those Ryzen scores are on LN2

Uriel · 23 Feb 2017 at 11:44

Silent_Scone said:
Those Ryzen scores are on LN2

Really? Looks like the brown and orange ones are at 3.6 GHz to me. Is there a problem with the graph, other than it being blurry?

An Exception · 23 Feb 2017 at 11:44

Silent_Scone said:
Those Ryzen scores are on LN2

I heard they are on water. The 5Ghz+ ones are on LN2.

Below is the LN2

AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X-Cinebench-R15-World-Record_2-840x451.png

An Exception · 23 Feb 2017 at 11:46

Uriel said:
Really? Looks like they're at 3.6 GHz to me. Is there a problem with the graph, other than it being blurry?

Yeh doesn't look to be reported right. I was told the CPU was at 4.66Ghz

Considering the 1800x auto boosts to 4.1Ghz, it doesn't seem, a stretch to imagine them being able to hit the 4.5-4.6Ghz range with some manual overclocking.

Silent_Scone · 23 Feb 2017 at 12:01

Uriel said:
Really? Looks like the brown and orange ones are at 3.6 GHz to me. Is there a problem with the graph, other than it being blurry?

Look at the score above. 4.6 is dream territory, also.

Not long to find out now.

An Exception · 23 Feb 2017 at 12:05

Silent_Scone said:
Look at the score above. 4.6 is dream territory, also.

You don't think 4.6Ghz on water is feasible?
500mhz over stock overclock too much of a stretch I guess.

Considering LN2 Vs LN2 it seems the 1800x beats every other CPU. So water Vs water seems like it could be possible to me.

"At these speeds, the chip was able to score 2449 Cinebench points in the multi-threaded tests, breaking the previous world record of 2410 Cinebench points."

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-world-record/

Jono8 · 23 Feb 2017 at 12:10

No, I have a 5820k and what AMD are kicking out now isn't really any better in price/performance compared to 5820k set up prices in late 2015 (AMD have not been helped by the pound plummeting and ddr 4 prices going crazy since - I think my 5820k set up actually worked out cheaper back in 2015 than if you bought a 1600x set up now!).

It is also sitting happily at 4.4ghz so in terms of single core performance it doesn't like like Ryzen is going to be much better compared to what I have now.

In a few years, if AMD can up the clock speeds and IPC some more and continue to keep prices reasonable, then I will be well up for getting an 8 core Zen then.

If you already have Haswell E/Broadwell E I really can't see the point in switching to Ryzen unless you could genuinely do with the 8 cores instead of 6 if you only have a 6 core.

An Exception · 23 Feb 2017 at 12:18

Jono8 said:
No, I have a 5820k and what AMD are kicking out now isn't really any better in price/performance compared to 5820k set up prices in late 2015 (AMD have not been helped by the pound plummeting and ddr 4 prices going crazy since - I think my 5820k set up actually worked out cheaper back in 2015 than if you bought a 1600x set up now!).

Look at the prices NOW. Not years ago. Intel is simply ripping people off. Obvious is obvious.

6950x = £1,623.98 = LOL

~>Dg<~ · 23 Feb 2017 at 12:31

yes but like we have stated is it intel who adjusted the markets and dollar to pound ? nope.

time is a relevant factor as is amd not having a product to challenge.i dont get why so many get angry or annoyed.

An Exception · 23 Feb 2017 at 12:38

~>Dg<~ said:
yes but like we have stated is it intel who adjusted the markets and dollar to pound ? nope.

time is a relevant factor as is amd not having a product to challenge.i dont get why so many get angry or annoyed.

Because there are a large number of people who have cult think.
I've been using Intel CPU's for the past 17 years. Personally I can't wait to be free of their extortion/monopoly with viable alternatives.

ChrisD. · 23 Feb 2017 at 12:45

No idea about Rz performance, but I really don't feel the need to upgrade my 5960X.

Bluntwrapped · 23 Feb 2017 at 12:57

Currency conversion has little to do with it though. If you look at Intel's strategy over the last few years cutting manufacturing cost while maximising sales profit, and research investment has been the focus.

Small changes like selling premium desktop CPU's with crap thermal material under the IHS saves millions in production costs.

Since this is the complete opposite of benefiting the end consumer in terms of thermal performance/price/actual performance gain vs the previous generation it is fair to consider Intel as just another corporation who like to **** all over the consumer.

It's to be expected really, the only thing that annoys me is those who try and suggest differently

Dare I say, the corporate 'apologist'

mentality is part of the reason why the western world is in such a mess at moment.

Combat Fighter · 23 Feb 2017 at 13:37

~>Dg<~ said:
yes the x299 stuff is supposed to be monster stuff. i think thats where you will see big gains again for intel.

And crush AMD to a pulp for another decade.