• 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.

Intel coffee lake prices

Exactly that cat^^. The same performance discrepancy is also seen with the skylake X CPU's.
If you want no compromise gaming its intel mainstream that you go to. (Insert toothpaste and heat jokes in here)
Until AMD push from the software side, this is how it will remain.

I, and others do not wish to compromise on performance.
If AMD can top all the gaming charts then I'll jump ship. Hell I'd even go to VIA if they can compete.
 
SiDeards73 said:
I think you will find WoW us actually Multithreaded but extremely limited and poorly, have a dig around you will find out the specifics.
Click to expand...
A game engine can use 100 threads and still be bottlenecked by a single thread. That's why some games have higher peak FPS on Intel chips but smoother FPS distribution on AMD ones. Game engines still need to improve in this area, and the fact that "new" games regularly still use relatively ancient game engines doesn't help. It's a slow process.
 
What irks me with FO4,is that I see no information to show its received a single Ryzen specific optimisation despite multiple patches being released since Ryzen was launched and most seem to be Creation Club related. AMD is a Bethesda partner FFS,surely they must have benchmarked Intel and AMD CPUs in the game or even looked at the reviews FFS where the game was actually reducing Ryzen averages across the board. I honestly cannot understand why they haven't told Bethesda as a partner to get the game running in a better shape on Ryzen as its been nearly a year. Its almost like they are not even aware of how their own products run their partners games!!

But this is the same AMD when Raven Ridge was released,never bothered sending the HP X360 to reviewers and not even the Intel equivalent model,so it ended up with review sites having to buy their own, testing different laptops and jumping to somewhat incorrect conclusions,since it would cost too much for them to buy two laptops with their own money. Its almost like AMD had no interest in selling any Raven Ridge based laptops. Yet,Intel supplied some of the laptops the HP X360 was tested against! I mean seriously for a few $1000 they were willing to have all the somewhat less than positive PR after spending millions of USD on developing the APU.

It does make me wonder at times.
 
Last edited:
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
What irks me with FO4,is that I see no information to show its received a single Ryzen specific optimisation despite multiple patches being released since Ryzen was launched and most seem to be Creation Club related. AMD is a Bethesda partner FFS,surely they must have benchmarked Intel and AMD CPUs in the game or even looked at the reviews FFS where the game was actually reducing Ryzen averages across the board. I honestly cannot understand why they haven't told Bethesda as a partner to get the game running in a better shape on Ryzen as its been nearly a year. Its almost like they are not even aware of how their own products run their partners games!!

But this is the same AMD when Raven Ridge was released,never bothered sending the HP X360 to reviewers and not even the Intel equivalent model,so it ended up with review sites having to buy their oen testing different laptops and jumping to somewhat incorrect conclusions,since it would cost too much for them to buy two laptops with their own money. Its almost like AMD had no interest in selling any Raven Ridge based laptops. Yet,Intel supplied some of the laptops the HP X360 was tested against!

It does make me wonder at times.
Click to expand...

Yes Fo4 is another reason why i've not jumped on the ryzen upgrade . Its all very well and good for amd to look to the future but there is a massive amount of MMO/rpg players on these types of games that wont be getting new engines anytime soon if ever in the games life cycle. Hopefully ryzen + gets close enough to intel that the pro points that ryzen brings does make it worthwhile for some of us to change to it.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
The issue with them trying to think of the future,is that it will take time for such tech to start getting integrated into games so the benefit won't be seem immediately,so they also need to think of the present too. AMD needs to use it resources to worry less about future technology and try to gain more current sales,and many MMOs,etc are not listed on Steam so that is millions of players.

Its a depressing fact but so many MMOs and openworld games are based on older engines,and it is why its rare to see many scale properly with more cores or even incorporate DX12/Vulkan and it also means when newer versions of these games are developed they will still have the fundamental issues and these are games which are played by millions and millions of players. In fact some of those shiny games which people talk about on tech forums don't sell as many copies and are not making hundreds of millions or billions of USD for the games companies,and the player numbers drop off very rapidly. The issue is that things like Vulkan/DX12 benefit people with older CPUs more anyway,so they are hardly going to drive sales of newer CPUs. Every game DX12/Vulkan game I have played as ran well on my IB Core i7 like AOTS,and you will find many people will usually buy a new CPU for games which tend to thread poorly and only in one or two games you see the opposite happen,ie,BF1 but DICE like Crytek are forward looking but that is sadly not very common.

Both Intel and Nvidia actively target these kind of games,even with promos,since they get a lot of sales from them,and Bethesda is an AMD gaming partner,who is meant to be optimising its games for AMD CPUs and GPUs. If this was some Intel/Nvidia partner I might cut them some more slack. FO4 only came out 16 months before Ryzen was launched and its the last game Bethesda actually made(as opposed to published),yet where is all these optimisations Bethesda is meant to do for AMD CPUs and GPUs?? Apparently not happening it seems with its own games so AMD has gotten a raw deal from them methinks,and Wolfenstein II and Prey 2 which are Bethesda published games which did puhs some AMD optimisations are not even in the top 50 on Steam anymore which is expected as they are FPS games and will soon fall down the list within a few months. Open world,online games,etc tend to have staying power over time,and by extension more people will buy them.

Most of the people buying these games won't be enthusiasts,they will be gamers,and once they get locked into Intel/Nvidia it will be hard to get them out of buying anything else,and AMD not pushing its own gaming partner to optimise for its CPUs is unlikely to change that.

This is basically AMD leaving performance on the table. Its been the better part of a year FFS!!

This means AMD ends up having to brute force it - unless Ryzen+ has some core tweaks which improves performance,or the single CCX Ryzen APU plays nicer with these games,it will probably take something like Ryzen 2 to just use sheer IPC and clockspeed to do the job.

I don't want to get another Intel CPU,as the longevity of AM4 is a big deal for me and I am bored of staying on Intel due to their segmentation,but my current CPU is starting to become more and more of a limitation in certain games,so it looks like I will be probably be waiting until next year at this rate for Ryzen 2. Maybe by then I might get bored of certain games,so won't care as much! ;) :p
Click to expand...

Cost, it costs a lot of money for a game developer to develop a new engine, given that there is no pressure from gamers to invest in their engine why would they?

So, what do you want? do you want AMD to pay for the development of new engines for these games?

I don't, i want AMD to invest what matters to me, if you want better WoW engines direct your fury at those developers..... AMD are not there to pickup the cost of your miss directed frustrations.
Some Elf and Dragons cult game doesn't matter to me or the rest of the industry.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
Cost, it costs a lot of money for a game developer to develop a new engine, given that there is no pressure from gamers to invest in their engine why would they?

So, what do you want? do you want AMD to pay for the development of new engines for these games?

I don't, i want AMD to invest what matters to me, if you want better WoW engines direct your fury at those developers..... AMD are not there to pickup the cost of your miss directed frustrations.
Some Elf and Dragons cult game doesn't matter to me or the rest of the industry.
Click to expand...

Bethesda is an AMD partner and yet it is very telling that you don't even consider how popular the games they make - FO4 made something like $750 million in its first day(its also sci-fi fantasy). Most games don't thread perfectly,and most engines don't do the same,so whilst AMD is chasing the future ,Intel,etc will just steal sales AMD should be taking away from them. So if AMD wants to maximise it sales,then not trying to push its own partners to improve performance with its own CPUs only affects itself. You think FO4 is bad - look at Hitman,which is AMD sponsored:

https://img.purch.com/r/600x450/aHR...ZL1ovNzIxODM1L29yaWdpbmFsL2ltYWdlMDAyLnBuZw==
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8400/images/hitman_1920_1080_min.png

Look at where a Core i5 8400 lands relative to a Ryzen 5 1600X as both should roughly boost to 3.6GHZ~3.8GHZ out of the box on the stock cooler. This is a DX12 game,and obviously is using upto six cores looking at the scaling. The difference between the Ryzen 5 and the Core i5 8400 is much greater than the IPC difference. Yep,probably another optimisation issue.

So this is also somewhat on AMD - if they can't get their own partners to optimise their own CPUs after nearly a year,who the heck will?? If AMD wants to maximise their sales,they need to do their legwork against an incumbant. Also plonking tech into short FPS games whilst cool won't do much for them. See Wolfenstein II or Prey 2 anywhere in the top50 steam games list now?? Nope,so that effort is only temporary since they are FPS games. Many of the games some of us mention are much longer term,and have playthroughs in the 100s of hours,and are relevant for much longer for most gamers. Maybe you need to look at Nvidia(and to a lesser degree Intel) and how they seem to be involved in sponsoring or incorporating tech into such "unsexy" games. Numbers and longevity. I honestly hope that Far Cry 5 which is apparently using FP16 and looks to be sponsored by AMD RTG,does have Ryzen CPU optimisations from the start,as the last Far Cry released in 2016,ie,Far Cry Primal didn't scale well with more cores.

In the end if AMD wants more people to buy it CPUs it needs to put effort into optimising for current games,not just ones being released in the future in another year or two,since by that time Ryzen will be old hat,as Ryzen 2 or Ryzen 3 will be released. Some of those Core i5 8400 victories shouldn't be so large at all,especially for a CPU running at 3.8GHZ or thereabouts. If I need to wait for the true potential of Ryzen to be revealed in future games,I might as well just skip Ryzen,Ryzen+ and so on and go straight onto Ryzen 2 when hopefully these future games will be released.

TBH,I think they are falling into the same trap as what is doing their GPU division in. They try to aim for future tech,which takes time to actually get incorporated into many games,whilst most games end up using current and older tech and Nvidia wins by default. So they are ignoring current games since they are looking at future releases,but at the expense of current games where the hardware is not performing as good as it should be. If Ryzen performed as well in gaming as it did in non-gaming,then it would be another kettle of fish. Remember when AMD dominated with the Athlon,Athlon XP and Athlon 64,it was not only because they would be good in future games,but also since they beat Intel in current ones(or at least matched them).

Anyway,I have argued too much about this,so we should agree to disagree on this and let it be.

Knowing me,despite my moaning I will probably just end up getting Ryzen 2 anyway unless I am forced to upgrade earlier.

triss said:
Yes Fo4 is another reason why i've not jumped on the ryzen upgrade . Its all very well and good for amd to look to the future but there is a massive amount of MMO/rpg players on these types of games that wont be getting new engines anytime soon if ever in the games life cycle. Hopefully ryzen + gets close enough to intel that the pro points that ryzen brings does make it worthwhile for some of us to change to it.
Click to expand...

Yeah,its annoying but I think part of the issue is some of the newer games are just not as fun with all the loot crate crap,etc so I end up going back to older games. I mean even Mass Effect:Andromeda which actually used the Frostbite engine,so scales well with cores,etc was a pretty game but EA totally and utterly have destroyed Bioware and the series. I was hoping that would be my go to game for the time-being but whereas it was not a bad game,its not as special as the older ones. 2017 was a rubbish year for games IMHO. I even tried playing some ARK again,as its somewhat better optimised,but it seems UE4 based games are a bit hit and miss on using more threads too,which is not an excuse for a modern engine IMHO. Its what makes me worried about the System Shock remake this year.

OTH,Metro Exodus should show reasonable core scaling if they are using the same engine as in the Redux games,so I think that should be OK.
 
Last edited:
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Bethesda is an AMD partner and yet it is very telling that you don't even consider how popular the games they make - FO4 made something like $750 million in its first day(its also sci-fi fantasy). Most games don't thread perfectly,and most engines don't do the same,so whilst AMD is chasing the future ,Intel,etc will just steal sales AMD should be taking away from them. So if AMD wants to maximise it sales,then not trying to push its own partners to improve performance with its own CPUs only affects itself. You think FO4 is bad - look at Hitman,which is AMD sponsored:

https://img.purch.com/r/600x450/aHR...ZL1ovNzIxODM1L29yaWdpbmFsL2ltYWdlMDAyLnBuZw==
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8400/images/hitman_1920_1080_min.png

Look at where a Core i5 8400 lands relative to a Ryzen 5 1600X as both should roughly boost to 3.6GHZ~3.8GHZ out of the box on the stock cooler. This is a DX12 game,and obviously is using upto six cores looking at the scaling. The difference between the Ryzen 5 and the Core i5 8400 is much greater than the IPC difference. Yep,probably another optimisation issue.

So this is also somewhat on AMD - if they can't get their own partners to optimise their own CPUs after nearly a year,who the heck will?? If AMD wants to maximise their sales,they need to do their legwork against an incumbant. Also plonking tech into short FPS games whilst cool won't do much for them. See Wolfenstein II or Prey 2 anywhere in the top50 steam games list now?? Nope,so that effort is only temporary since they are FPS games. Many of the games some of us mention are much longer term,and have playthroughs in the 100s of hours,and are relevant for much longer for most gamers. Maybe you need to look at Nvidia(and to a lesser degree Intel) and how they seem to be involved in sponsoring or incorporating tech into such "unsexy" games. Numbers and longevity. I honestly hope that Far Cry 5 which is apparently using FP16 and looks to be sponsored by AMD RTG,does have Ryzen CPU optimisations from the start,as the last Far Cry released in 2016,ie,Far Cry Primal didn't scale well with more cores.

In the end if AMD wants more people to buy it CPUs it needs to put effort into optimising for current games,not just ones being released in the future in another year or two,since by that time Ryzen will be old hat,as Ryzen 2 or Ryzen 3 will be released. Some of those Core i5 8400 victories shouldn't be so large at all,especially for a CPU running at 3.8GHZ or thereabouts. If I need to wait for the true potential of Ryzen to be revealed in future games,I might as well just skip Ryzen,Ryzen+ and so on and go straight onto Ryzen 2 when hopefully these future games will be released.

TBH,I think they are falling into the same trap as what is doing their GPU division in. They try to aim for future tech,which takes time to actually get incorporated into many games,whilst most games end up using current and older tech and Nvidia wins by default. So they are ignoring current games since they are looking at future releases,but at the expense of current games where the hardware is not performing as good as it should be. If Ryzen performed as well in gaming as it did in non-gaming,then it would be another kettle of fish. Remember when AMD dominated with the Athlon,Athlon XP and Athlon 64,it was not only because they would be good in future games,but also since they beat Intel in current ones(or at least matched them).

Anyway,I have argued too much about this,so we should agree to disagree on this and let it be.

Knowing me,despite my moaning I will probably just end up getting Ryzen 2 anyway unless I am forced to upgrade earlier.



Yeah,its annoying but I think part of the issue is some of the newer games are just not as fun with all the loot crate crap,etc so I end up going back to older games. I mean even Mass Effect:Andromeda which actually used the Frostbite engine,so scales well with cores,etc was a pretty game but EA totally and utterly have destroyed Bioware and the series. I was hoping that would be my go to game for the time-being but whereas it was not a bad game,its not as special as the older ones. 2017 was a rubbish year for games IMHO. I even tried playing some ARK again,as its somewhat better optimised,but it seems UE4 based games are a bit hit and miss on using more threads too,which is not an excuse for a modern engine IMHO. Its what makes me worried about the System Shock remake this year.

OTH,Metro Exodus should show reasonable core scaling if they are using the same engine as in the Redux games,so I think that should be OK.
Click to expand...

With respect i'm not going to read all of this, i think i get the gist of it.

All i'm going to say to you is this.

If AMD spend $5m on developing the FO4 engine to run like Intel how many of its Intel users are going to switch to AMD?

Bethesda get a new engine, AMD pay for it, there has to be a return for AMD on that investment, its not there for FO4, its too late, its been out too long and the mindset over it isn't going to change, its just a huge waste of money, money i'd rather they invest in the future, like perhaps FO5.

bru said:
Ok DM you can give cat his account back now.:p
Click to expand...

This ^^^^ please do :P
 
£ is now up to $1.42 today, about the same level as it was before the referendum.

Can't wait to see the excuses companies and retailers will use for not restoring prices to pre referendum levels...:rolleyes:
 
To be frank i'm itching to upgrade from 7600k to 7700k, reason is because i do not want to buy a new motherboard if i was to upgrade to 8700k and secondly don't want to buy ram not at those prices.

Thanks for the update on the pound there @Cooper
 
Companies buy a product for a price then if the pound goes down they inflate the price so that in the end they still get the profit they want.

The problem is when the pound returns they can then claim they bought x amount at the lower worse price and still keep there price high (giving them bigger profit's) which is pretty much a swindle, so the customer often gets hurt on the drop and on the rise its only when there is complete stability we get a fair price.

And all the while there is also supply and demand going on which can further make the price crazy and is also a swindle as there is no limit to how high they can change the price too (and often all companies follow suit to cash in on the feast).

In the end there should be a nice room for the product-reseller to get there profits and the customer to pay a fair price for it but a lot of the time it just does not happen.
 
Hah after posting my non reverent post, i have just read all of the posts in this thread.

Too be honest for games i am defiantly leaning towards intel its a no brainer but for humbug he is leaning towards amd because he creates stuff with software that uses ryzen to it's potential.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom