Ryzen "2" ?

[chrcoluk]

+1
We have been told time and time again on this thread and others that Ryzen max clock is 3.9Ghz to 4.1Ghz. Well, as it happens in all the time i've had my 1700 i've never seen one post on here to prove that. By that i mean to say 12 hours OCCT AVX enabled. The only post i have ever seen on this forum is my own post at 3.8Ghz OCCT 12 hours AVX enabled. So i actually take all the 4 to 4.1Ghz claims with a large pinch of salt. But i would defo take an increase to 4.2Ghz with both hands and 4.3Ghz if i got a lucky chip.

yeah this applies to both amd and intel.

1 - reviewer gets cherry picked chip and gets good result
2 - reviewer on top of this doesnt do proper stability tests, they may install windows, play around on desktop, run prime 95 for a few mins, and play some games for 10 mins, and suddenly "its stable".
3 - in real world we play silicon lottery, production chips may have corners cut on production, and consumers may also have worsened lottery odds when possibly getting a lottery loser chip previously returned to retailer as a supposedly new chip.
4 - consumers may also run proper stability tests and use their systems in way that trigger instabilities that reviewers never considered.

Result - real world performance is underwhelming vs hype.

I remember my gtx 970, those gpus were supposedly a safe bet to hit 1.4ghz clocks, my evga 970 actually crashed at 1.3ghz never mind 1.4ghz, and at 1.4ghz it was a disaster without a bios mod to ramp up voltages (and watts limit).

 

[chrcoluk]

I think the thing that has annoyed people about Intel is how they stopped pushing themselves as soon as AMD fell behind.

Intel were knocking out the X5670 6 core 12 thread CPU in Q1 2010 with a 95w TDP that were great clockers - that was on 32nm, so they could definitely have been pushing more powerful chips into the consumer space long ago - do you think we'd have got mainstream 6c12t coffee lake when we did if Ryzen hadn't shown up?

I don't think most people care if there next box will have an Intel or AMD chip in, they worship at the alter of performace per £ - which is why AMD happen to very popular on here right now.

Of course

I have no doubt whatsoever if there was no ZEN architecture, then coffee lake would be a quad core chip. Competition always affects the rate of progress especially in terms of value for money.

 

[chrcoluk]

That's nowt, 8700K here bottlenecking the 1080TI to a GTX 1060. GPU doesn't get much past 60%.

umm, the cpu isnt maxed out either, looks like a possible game engine bottleneck rather than hardware bottleneck, which I have seen in games a fair few times, where performance seems to hit ceiling even without hardware been fully utilised. He also may have capped FPS.

 

[Sao_Sin]

well, we still ain't sure. If the 1600 is doing you, you'd probably do better with a bigger card than a bigger CPU, depends what you're playing/using it for.

Thanks, yeah I'm currently just trying to keep an eye on trends as the current setup is running most of what I can throw at it at the moment. Still waiting for GPUs to fall in price after the crypto crash, reckon I could be waiting a while!

 

[Sao_Sin]

I don't see a point from upgrading from the previous generation.

Better upgrade the GPU if you want better performance.

Yeah that's the plan for me ultimately. Building the nephew a pc though so toying with the new Gen and donate him doso of my old parts, though probably a tad overkill for Minecraft!

 

[nashathedog]

No doubt about it, AMD being competitive again has forced intel to improve its game.
Just funny how many up and down computer forums on t interwebbys dont see that and blindly keep pursuing an agenda to hurt AMD sales as much as possible.
Fools, immature idiots or folk with money involved ... any which way there comments should be ignored.

Same goes for AMD as well though, say they leapfrog intel over the next 12 to 24 months and stay way out front with there fancy "fabric" and ability to keep adding resources.. we might actually be in a position to root for intel then to keep up the competition.. will seem weird that

AMD got a lot right in 2017 but they also got a lot wrong, Hopefully there won't be many issues with the Ryzen+ release, When Ryzen released I sat back and watched what was going on, I didn't buy into Ryzen until about 5 or 6 months after it released at which time all I had to do was a bios update for the motherboard and it was mostly smooth sailing. I'm not sure why you think regular consumers would be pushing an anti AMD agenda though, It makes no sense as a stronger AMD creates a stronger Intel and likewise with the graphics industry. If something is done wrong we shouldn't ignore it. They need the feedback just like we need them to act on it.

 

[Sao_Sin]

I totally understand, I get itchy fingers from time to time.

The temptation is real!

 

[Sao_Sin]

Seen elsewhere..

Thanks! Does it state what gpu was being used by the non Apu chips?

 

[LOLN1]

This is why many of us are patiently waiting for game testing that examines an x470 board with overclocked memory.

To be fair though, it's difficult to say the test showed a 24 fps difference since the player positioning in each test was a tad off. Not that I could have done any better! The actual fps difference could be a touch more or less.

It is difficult to glue the same scene.
I tried several times but the result is the same
There is a difference between 10-12 fps average
At some points it is 20 fps

 

[Yaayuh!]

We need a new DX11 benchmark.

 

[Zeed]

This would be interesting - but I bet Intel's 8 core doesn't do 5ghz any more... Starting to think we are in the prime of single-thread performance right now :S

Best once can have now is 8x4.9 or 10x4.8 on binned cpus. So ye We wont see 5 but 4.9 exists from few months but thats a 1500 quid cpu cant compare to 350 pounds can have 2 builds for price of cpu itself haha

 

[eddiew]

Best once can have now is 8x4.9 or 10x4.8 on binned cpus. So ye We wont see 5 but 4.9 exists from few months but thats a 1500 quid cpu cant compare to 350 pounds can have 2 builds for price of cpu itself haha

A £1500 CPU that you need to delid if you want to cool it. Bit of a mickey take, really

Feels like we need some serious materials research if we're going to get past 5ghz with many cores. Silicon seems to be really hitting a wall these days...

 

[humbug]

people talking about 5Ghz Intel, especially when it comes to anything near that on Skylake-X to me just reads like a dishonest advert.

It would be idiotic to explain you need to take the Heat Spreader off and replace the TIM to achieve those numbers, which incidentally voids the warranty, and that they use a vast amount power and run extremely hot under overclocks like that requiring very expensive cooling.

But to just drop it into conversions, a lot, as if its a given that "Intel CPU's are 5Ghz CPU's" its not a given and even if you do manage it on your now delidid warrenty-less CPU realistically you're not going to be running it at that speed 24/7 anyway, because of the noise, the heat, the power consumption.

 

[LOLN1]

Today if I can stream video bf1

 

[humbug]

Cool ^^^^

 

[Steveocee]

Today if I can stream video bf1

Is there any chance of a "stock" non overclock comparison of a 2700 vs a 1700? I'm interested to know how AMD compare against their previous Gen.

 

[humbug]

Is there any chance of a "stock" non overclock comparison of a 2700 vs a 1700? I'm interested to know how AMD compare against their previous Gen.

Yeah this ^^^^^ +1001

 

[Mercutio]

Have screen capture running, load a save, try and do the same stuff from the save onwards (like we'd do save scumming in FPS) it won't be perfect but it'll be close.

 

[Steveocee]

There is so much conversation (or has been) over whether the "new" Ryzen will beat Intel and so on, well. FWIW I don't care! I have a 1700X and I want to know how much better a 2700X will be so I can start justifying it to myself to reduce the buyers remorse.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

There is so much conversation (or has been) over whether the "new" Ryzen will beat Intel and so on, well. FWIW I don't care! I have a 1700X and I want to know how much better a 2700X will be so I can start justifying it to myself to reduce the buyers remorse.

To be honest, I'm not too fussed whether it beats Intel. As long as it's ballpark I'll jump into this second serving of Ryzen. I just want to try AMD out and if I'm losing a few FPS I certainly won't be losing any sleep over it.

Just as long as there's no memory issues etc.. because I've got plenty RAM already and I don't want to be buying any more to match it.