• 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.

Official OcUK Ryzen review thread

Seems to be Single core performance intel is winning and multi core performance AMD is winning. PCper is saying anything above 1080p the Ryzen is more than enough.
 
I was considering moving from 6700K to Ryzen, but clearly that would be somewhat of a downgrade reference gaming. It is close, but we're obviously talking quite an outlay for new CPU and mbd, certainly not worth it for gaming alone given you'll end up with worse FPS! I wonder if later chip revisions and better RAM speed (via BIOS updates presumably) will give it more of a boost? Is there actual good reason to think 4C/6C Ryzen CPUs will be 7700K beaters? I've seen this mentioned several times, but what's the thinking behind this?
 
thing is in some games its upto 20 fps down.thats a big graphics card difference.for everything else the new amd cpus are competitive for gaming intel is still king.also new x99 stuff to hit later which will take another big step infront.
 
I've been waiting to hit the "Place Order" button for a couple of weeks now. As I mainly use my PC for gaming I think I'm heading down the 7700K route to be honest. Sure, I could wait a bit but then you just end up waiting for the next big thing. Gotta bite the bullet sooner or later. I'd have loved to have headed back to AMD but maybe not right now.
 
shankly1985 said:
Be interesting to see more results for gaming at 1440p and above to take the bottleneck away from the CPU.
Click to expand...

In theory there shouldn't really be a bottleneck as in IPC they are not really far behind Intel's newest chips. It's a good match for the 6900 in everything bar gaming. Possibly the motherboard platforms needing some bios updates. AMD just about hit a home run but the gaming side is a drawback. Saying that for everything else these chips are a bargain and should still sell well.

It's a brand new platform so there is still hope. As i usually use my PC for gaming when i upgrade i will have a big decision to make but Intel look to be getting my money. Shame as i really wanted to be going AMD. Still time though as i doubt i will be buying until later on in the year.
 
Looks good. Gaming performance is enough not to even notice the difference between a 1800x and 7700k. It's not going to beat kabylake in single core lets get real.
I suspect the 4 cores to match it though, given even intels 8 core cpus are not much overclockers either.
Multithread these are looking very nice.
 
Why so many differences between reviewers results? whats going on?

C92N9ospYWi7mkyddyimX2_ddd6gizmFHEI11drZiqY.png
 
you know, about a month ago, people were saying if it is around haswell performance then they will be happy. Now its going toe to toe with Kaby lake people seem somewhat disappointed. Im certainly excited to get my 1700
 
Chrisc said:
you know, about a month ago, people were saying if it is around haswell performance then they will be happy. Now its going toe to toe with Kaby lake people seem somewhat disappointed. Im certainly excited to get my 1700
Click to expand...
Yep because the bar gets raised and raised and raised during speculation until eventually no matter what it seems a disappointment when it shouldn't be.
 
This is what toms had to say.

"We come away from today's coverage with a number of questions that couldn't be answered in time for the launch. For instance, we discovered Ryzen's tendency to perform better in games with SMT disabled. Could this be a scheduling issue that might be fixed later? AMD did respond to our concerns, reminding us that Ryzen's implementation is unique, meaning most game engines don't use if efficiently yet. Importantly, the company told us that it doesn’t believe the SMT hiccup occurs at the operating system level, so a software fix could fix performance issues in many titles. At least one game developer (Oxide) stepped forward to back those claims. However, you run the risk that other devs don't spend time updating existing titles."
 
The different results might be down to RAM speeds maybe? I known people have said to me Ryzen will benefit more from faster RAM. Linus points at this abit in his video.
 
Well done AMD! Cracking CPU's in my eyes. Glad my recently bought 6800k is neck and neck with the 1700x, relieved is an understatement :P

Although if i was buying again, i'd take a SERIOUS look at AMD. Havent been AMD since my old mobile barton 2500 days. When i do my annual 3-year upgrade things will certainly be a bit spicy!
 
I understand from a productivity POV they're good but from a gaming POV it's a disaster as far as I'm concerned and massively disappointing. The flagship 1800X, a 500 euro 8c/16t CPU, trading blows with the Ivy Bridge 2700K OC'd for christ sake in a lot of reviews and loosing to Kaby Lake i5.

I'm talking about games performance only, just to make that clear.

Was 100% on a Ryzen R5/1080Ti new build....now it will 100% be Intel again.

So disappointed as a gamer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom