CPU Longevity?

[gavinh87]

It amuses me to see figures like this What is SMT? Like Intel's HT? So Ryzen 8C16T < Intel 2C4T regarding stuttering-free experience?

I'm sure you are cherry picking these out. There are tons out there that show the complete opposite.

 

[voidshatter]

I'm sure you are cherry picking these out. There are tons out there that show the complete opposite.

No, I really didn't. I was using google to search for something like "ryzen battlefield 1 frametimes" and this site came in the first few results for me.

 

[gavinh87]

Those memory slides seem to not tie in with a lot of other reviews. Even my own findings.
Which goes back to the adoredtv video - reviewers can make the results go which ever way they want. They don't show us what particular section of the game they were using.
Go check out mindblanktech and see his 4 GHz ryzen beating the 5ghz i7 with 3600 memory.

 

[humbug]

I'm sure you are cherry picking these out. There are tons out there that show the complete opposite.

He's making a missive issue out of a chart that is clearly GPU bound, highlighting 1 FPS, gosh... all the charts he's coming up with are early reviews with 2400Mhz RAM and beta BIOSes, and yet despite this still not one of them proves anything he's saying.

He's just jumping up and down making a lot of noise and hoping by being that loud and persistent someone might listen to him.

Finding charts and screaming around in here is his life right now...

 

[humbug]

Personally i like TPU because they use a very broad range of about 20 games and average out the overall performance.

Anyone can put up a single chart having cherry picked a single game to try and drive home an agenda, no one plays just one game, people play a broad range of games. Some times AMD are faster, other times its Intel, so instead of cherry picking from that here is a single chart to sum up performance at 3 resolutions.

At worst a 7% difference between the 7700K and the Ryzen 1600X, the Ryzen 1600, which is the same chip is £200, the 7700K is £350.

Let the hate commence....

PS: if like them you use a GTX 1080, your playing at 1440P, every game i play is at 1440P with a GTX 1070.

2.1% win for the 7700K, £150 more expensive. <and always will be for as long as people are willing to do Intel's dirty work for them.

AMD ARE back, Intel have actual competition again. How the cost of your computing is to shape up over the next few years is entirely down to you people, don't be stupid, you will pay for it!

 

[voidshatter]

Personally i like TPU because they use a very broad range of about 20 games and average out the overall performance.

Anyone can put up a single chart having cherry picked a single game to try and drive home an agenda, no one plays just one game, people play a broad range of games. Some times AMD are faster, other times its Intel, so instead of cherry picking from that here is a single chart to sum up performance at 3 resolutions.

So you are finally giving up on the Metro LL at 720p lowest settings?

At worst a 7% difference between the 7700K and the Ryzen 1600X, the Ryzen 1600, which is the same chip is £200, the 7700K is £350.

And by applying the same logic:

Pentium G4560: £56.89 for 93.1%
Core i3-7100: £ 109.99 for 98%

Ryzen 5 1400: £149.99 for 91.6%
Ryzen 5 1600: £199.99 for 100%
Ryzen 7 1700: £299.99 for 99%
Ryzen 7 1800X: £428.99 for 102%

Wow! What a bloody failure for the Ryzen product line! We should all go for those 2C2T and 2C4T CPUs! What a bargain!

 

[gavinh87]

So you are finally giving up on the Metro LL at 720p lowest settings?



And by applying the same logic:

Pentium G4560: £56.89 for 93.1%
Core i3-7100: £ 109.99 for 98%

Ryzen 5 1400: £149.99 for 91.6%
Ryzen 5 1600: £199.99 for 100%
Ryzen 7 1700: £299.99 for 99%
Ryzen 7 1800X: £428.99 for 102%

Wow! What a bloody failure for the Ryzen product line! We should all go for those 2C2T and 2C4T CPUs! What a bargain!

Wow. Just. Wow.

 

[gavinh87]

Personally i like TPU because they use a very broad range of about 20 games and average out the overall performance.

Anyone can put up a single chart having cherry picked a single game to try and drive home an agenda, no one plays just one game, people play a broad range of games. Some times AMD are faster, other times its Intel, so instead of cherry picking from that here is a single chart to sum up performance at 3 resolutions.

At worst a 7% difference between the 7700K and the Ryzen 1600X, the Ryzen 1600, which is the same chip is £200, the 7700K is £350.

Let the hate commence....

PS: if like them you use a GTX 1080, your playing at 1440P, every game i play is at 1440P with a GTX 1070.

2.1% win for the 7700K, £150 more expensive. <and always will be for as long as people are willing to do Intel's dirty work for them.

AMD ARE back, Intel have actual competition again. How the cost of your computing is to shape up over the next few years is entirely down to you people, don't be stupid, you will pay for it!

I'm leaving this thread. Even when it's in front of his eyes he refuses to believe it. I guess buyers remorse has kicked him for his i7. (A T variant nonetheless) let's see how that holds up when devs are making games for the new intel lines too.

 

[humbug]

I'm leaving this thread. Even when it's in front of his eyes he refuses to believe it. I guess buyers remorse has kicked him for his i7. (A T variant nonetheless) let's see how that holds up when devs are making games for the new intel lines too.

I don't blame you mate

 

[voidshatter]

I guess buyers remorse has kicked him for his i7

To your disappointment, nope I deliberately waited to see the Ryzen benchmarks, and then bought a binned 7700K (5.1GHz for £275)~~~ I'm glad that you are happy with your Ryzen

 

[Thekwango]

I'm leaving this thread. Even when it's in front of his eyes he refuses to believe it. I guess buyers remorse has kicked him for his i7. (A T variant nonetheless) let's see how that holds up when devs are making games for the new intel lines too.

I don't blame you mate

I was actually contemplating rtm'ing his posts as it doesn't make any sense and has simply derailed the thread from the OP's original question. but watching him, waffle and mince and trying to argue in the face of facts has been much to entertaining!

 

[humbug]

I was actually contemplating rtm'ing his posts as it doesn't make any sense and has simply derailed the thread from the OP's original question. but watching him, waffle and mince and trying to argue in the face of facts has been much to entertaining!

lol....

 

[humbug]

While on the subject of RAM speed, faster RAM vs slower RAM makes a huge difference, its the difference between a 4Ghz Ryzen 1700X losing to a 5Ghz 7700K and winning if not matching it.

Spoiler: Example

 

[gavinh87]

nvm

 

[Journey]

Those minimums though, no wonder people say Ryzen seems much smoother/better for gaming, I should try some games out on one of the systems I built

It'll be nice to see the memory support improve, I wonder what 4000MHz DDR4 will be like?

 

[gavinh87]

Thought i'd leave this here. I'm not strong enough to stay away

What was that about a bottleneck at 720p and low settings?
This is with a 1080ti @1440p
This gap will only increase with better GPU's. Also with a 1ghz clock disadvantage.

 

[Thekwango]

Quick question, why is it that Ryzen is so much better with min fps, I get its the extra cores but what exactly is happening at the minimum end?

 

[gavinh87]

Thats exactly the reason for it. Its not choked like the i7. On game engines that can utilise more threads the higher core count pulls away despite the clock speed disadvantage.
The games that ryzen doesn't do so well on are older titles with engines that are not multicore aware
Heres another

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

^ What about vs Haswell-e/Broadwell-e? Any comparisons against those?

 

[gavinh87]

What is interesting is at 1440p when the GPU is the bottleneck, ryzen pulls ahead. If this is anything to go by then 8core CPU's are going to come into their own.