My own 3770K vs. R7 1700 games comparisons

[Drollic]

I often hear the Ryzen crushes intel in heavily multithreaded apps yet (and perhaps I'm wrong) but I suspect the vast majority of people on here are primarily gamers or use apps like photoshop/Lightroom that are already ridiculously fast on a quad core processor.

Now I don't doubt for one second that some people will be editing videos etc and require more cores, well good luck to you, but productivity doesn't strike me as the primary focus of these forums.

I feel there is a huge love of AMD though and I for one am constantly surprised at how people have defended Ryzen, saying it will get better, or now happy to wait for Zen+, or making excuses for the issues that have plagued it since launch and having a total disregard for the overwhelming weight of professional reviews and benchmarks that offer 'alternative facts'.

Fact is I'd buy one tomorrow if I needed the cores but I don't. I don't actually even need the 'good enough' Ryzen gaming performance!

This is why people are wanting the 6 core 1600x to clock at 4.2+. By Q2 a few patches and updates should have hit. It should make for a very good value gaming chip with some fast ddr4.

 

[Drollic]

double.

 

[Cyber-Mav]

If ram speed is making a big difference then i cant see am4 lasting long since it should have had triple channel at least to begin with.
Problem with amd is they always under perform and people then say wait for patches and updates etc but those never come and your stuck with 0 day performance. Amd has already said that the windows scheduler is working fine and there will be no patches for it. So looks like the results you see now is what you will have to live with.
I guess we need to see the cpu from amd's point of view and compare it to bulldozer, piledriver and excavator rather than comparing to intels offerings.

 

[chroniclard]

No, the 3770k gets pretty well battered by the 8 core Ryzen.

Flopper?

 

[steve258]

When the next generation of gfx cards arrive maybe they will shift things back to cpu limitations and then ryzen will look worse? Too much hype with ryzen. No wonder they left the multipliers unlocked the cpus dont even clock that high.
Zen2 will be interesting though.

All true of course, but only if you use next gen gpu to play this gen games . Only real reason why most people upgrade gfx is for higher resolution monitors or because new games demand it. So for the most part gpu will still be the bigger limiting factor.

 

[Brazo]

This is why people are wanting the 6 core 1600x to clock at 4.2+. By Q2 a few patches and updates should have hit. It should make for a very good value gaming chip with some fast ddr4.

Wait amd hope.

 

[opethdisciple]

AMD have always done this tho. They put their eggs in the basket that says 'prepare for tomorrow'. Which is fine. They did that with Bulldozer, releasing a CPU with cores but not much IPC, when the software ecosystem wasn't really ready for more cores but rather frequency and IPC.

The same with their GPU's. They've gone and got ahead of Nvidia in DX12 and Vulkan when in reality, we are still maybe a good year away until games come out built from the ground up with DX12 in mind.

So again, Nvidia has the 'faster' solution because they have gone for more grunt rather than full on API optimizations. They are behind when it comes to DX12 and Vulkan.

---

Same situation with Ryzen. We are not really at a point where games need 16 threads! Maybe we are starting to enter the era of 8 threads... you can see that with the recommended specs for games coming out now where they are advising chips which relative performance wise are slower than some Intel chips, but what they do have is more cores.