• 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 Ryzen Owners Thread ***

Scramz said:
I think you had a typo, you mean 4.075?

If you can get that to pass 10 H264 realbench runs then you have a winner of a chip!
Click to expand...
I used your results as a base line for when tuning my setup, above 4.0 I was not happy with the temps so dropped down to 3.9 for 24/7 running.

Anyone using a kraken X62? whats the nosie level like when at full load? I am currently using a Noctua NH-D15.
 
So from you guys experience

1700 - 3.9ghz is probably the sweetspot, 4ghz seems to want too much volts, but at 3.9 and lower the chip is relatively cool on an AIO or decent Air Cooler
1700X - Anyone have one and care to share experiences?
1800X - Runs hotter at stock, but can go to 4.2ghz without too much heat difference, under water?
 
easyrider said:
Its helpful for the community...

I'm not going to run those tests...As they are meaningless....

And better and smoother is Subjective

So your point is MOOT
Click to expand...

It's not really moot. It's absolutely relevant to him. He uses his PC how he needs to use it, and his experience of the differences is absolutely relevant to him. And to anyone who uses their PC in a similar fashion.

Whilst doing benches may be helpful for the community at large, there are plenty others out there who would do that for fun. So the information is out there, or will be soon enough. But for this person, why would he need to quantify his assertion that the computer is smoother for his usage? Data might be useful for those still to take the plunge, but personally, I'd rather listen to real world experiences from actual owners, running retail chips, rather than look at a league table for synthetic benchmarks.

For example, for me, cinebench results are an indication. But handbrake results are infinitely more useful to me, since I regularly use handbrake. Beyond that, if it's a more enjoyable experience for general browsing around the inter web, or watching YouTube, then that's really all I'm interested. Obviously other people have different priorities though.
 
SiDeards73 said:
So from you guys experience

1700 - 3.9ghz is probably the sweetspot, 4ghz seems to want too much volts, but at 3.9 and lower the chip is relatively cool on an AIO or decent Air Cooler
1700X - Anyone have one and care to share experiences?
1800X - Runs hotter at stock, but can go to 4.2ghz without too much heat difference, under water?
Click to expand...
Going from 3.9 - 4.2 considerations:

1. Is the the temp difference worth it for the small performance gain?
2. Is the cost of cooling worth it for the small performance gain?
 
awaybreaktoday said:
Going from 3.9 - 4.2 considerations:

1. Is the the temp difference worth it for the small performance gain?
2. Is the cost of cooling worth it for the small performance gain?
Click to expand...

Yeah im interested to see if the cost of going from a 1700 to 1700X or 1800X is worth it, i quite like the idea of a constant 4ghz all core, maybe even 4.1ghz, if the 1700X / 1800X are designed to be at the top end, and the 1700 is binned to be at the 65w range, the 1700X and 1800X might be more stable around 4.1ghz and able to manage the voltage better, comes down to cooling though i guess, i dont mind a chip that idles at 50c @ 4.0ghz and only hits say 70c under load, what i dont want is a chip that hits like 90c under load lol
 
SiDeards73 said:
Yeah im interested to see if the cost of going from a 1700 to 1700X or 1800X is worth it, i quite like the idea of a constant 4ghz all core, maybe even 4.1ghz, if the 1700X / 1800X are designed to be at the top end, and the 1700 is binned to be at the 65w range, the 1700X and 1800X might be more stable around 4.1ghz and able to manage the voltage better, comes down to cooling though i guess, i dont mind a chip that idles at 50c @ 4.0ghz and only hits say 70c under load, what i dont want is a chip that hits like 90c under load lol
Click to expand...
With 1700x 1800x you will get 4.1 stable:

hw_zpsax4yejzh.jpg

Notice my fan speeds, very loud, the loudness from the H110GT pump was unbearable....
 
awaybreaktoday said:
Going from 3.9 - 4.2 considerations:

1. Is the the temp difference worth it for the small performance gain?
2. Is the cost of cooling worth it for the small performance gain?
Click to expand...

IMO no, granted im still on the stock cooler for now. Corsair are dragging their feet. But the heat difference going through the voltages was significant. You could get a really good chip and be able to run low voltages but its all chance.



The performance increase didn't scale well for me either, not in gaming anyway. In heaven, overwatch and dirt rally the score were within margin of error, this might be different in productivity programs.
 
easyrider said:
I'm sorry but two extra cores isn't going to be earth shattering over a 5820k

I need data not Purchase justification complex.
Click to expand...
If you can do everything that you need to do then dont change anything and stick with what you have, no one can test your usage scenario for you only you can, unless you just sit there benchmarking all day long then you can refer to the many youtube vids.
 
easyrider said:
I'm sorry but two extra cores isn't going to be earth shattering over a 5820k

I need data not Purchase justification complex.
Click to expand...

It feels earth shattering for the loads I deal with. You don't have to take my comments on board, Gamers Nexus can help you there. ;)
 
Last edited:
awaybreaktoday said:
I used your results as a base line for when tuning my setup, above 4.0 I was not happy with the temps so dropped down to 3.9 for 24/7 running.

Anyone using a kraken X62? whats the nosie level like when at full load? I am currently using a Noctua NH-D15.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I feel the temps are extra V are not worth 100Mhz
 
awaybreaktoday said:
With 1700x 1800x you will get 4.1 stable:

hw_zpsax4yejzh.jpg

Notice my fan speeds, very loud, the loudness from the H110GT pump was unbearable....
Click to expand...

Hmmm prior to the Chips release i had my mind set on the 1800X, but then when i see people basically getting the same performance out of the 1700, im thinking thats the go to chip, but i would like to run 4ghz / 4.1ghz, so im wondering if the 1700X or 1800X might be the better option now... what we need is more people with the chips and their experiences etc :)
 
easyrider said:
What we need is screen shots of 12 hours Prime stable small FFT...
Click to expand...

Why? Not many of us use/play Prime all day, every day... and it's certainly no indication of the responsiveness of a system.

You seem to be argumentative4 for the sake of it.

Reviews have hard data for you - this is a user forum where people post their experience - and yes, some of them will even post "real data" for you.

If someone posts/says something you don't get anything from personally, why not jsut move on?
 
eyetrip said:
Why? Not many of us use/play Prime all day, every day... and it's certainly no indication of the responsiveness of a system.

You seem to be argumentative4 for the sake of it.

Reviews have hard data for you - this is a user forum where people post their experience - and yes, some of them will even post "real data" for you.

If someone posts/says something you don't get anything from personally, why not jsut move on?
Click to expand...

I find realbench is the best for checking stability and it's much much faster. Once it completes that, never have a fail. No need for hours or hours worth of testing anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom