• 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.

Ryzen "2" ?

No need to rush anything they'll be better off making sure the transition to 7nm will be a smooth one. If they can get to or around the 5ghz mark they will be very competitive indeed.
 
Ryzen 2 is already enough to force intel to do something, I know its just my opinion, but I honestly feel the i7 is in a bad place now, I think the i5 is fine but not i7. So I think when this z390 chipset comes out we may see 8 core i7's as a reaction, and even then it wont be comfortable for intel as they will probably be priced higher than ryzen 2 chips its competing against.
 
got my new setup arriving tommorow (2700x and a asus crosshair vii hero) see if i can get a hold of the newer bios 8505 i think ttl on oc3d said initial testing of the newer bois was promising and closed the gap on msi's offerings and increased overall performance, if all goes to plan and it works, i'll switch out my 8600k, z370 and convert to amd, see if my quad channel 3600mhz corsair dominator will work, fingers crossed :)
 
Last edited:
There's a few asked about boards. What, from x370 experiences were the strengths/weaknesses of the brands? E.g. Asrock, i think, had the best vrms but weak bios options? Msi and Giga seemed to be in a decent place. Asus had good memory support but rough edges in bios... I'm just not sure of the overall opinions.

Went with Asus prime as was in stock but... Not sure... One of its main selling points seems to be onboard sound, which I'm basically ignoring.
 
did you get prime deluxe? I would be concerned about the build quality of an asus prime board.

I think asus have the best bios of the bunch on their top end boards for sure tho.
 
Watched the GN review then watched Linus's review and really, if views reflected content they'd be switched.

Linus's entire theme was whining that it was a small improvement and not ryzen 2.

GN review was quite substantial and I liked it.
 
opethdisciple said:
My concern and I'm not sure how much of a concern this is, is as GPU's improve will the Ryzen chips keep pace with the Intel ones?
Click to expand...

Look at 720p. That's where things will end up as we get more powerfull gpus until more game engines are good multicore. So... AMD in second place but not like "shamed and humbled" in second place by any stretch of the imagination.

I'm pretty sure Bethesda, for example, were moving to a new engine soon, there's more games with reasonable multicore support so... It's probably going to almost even out.
 
Mercutio said:
I'm pretty sure Bethesda, for example, were moving to a new engine soon, there's more games with reasonable multicore support so... It's probably going to almost even out.
Click to expand...
They are,but AFAIK Starfield will most likely be using a version of Creation,but might be the last game using it. However,Fallout 4 was released before their partnership with AMD and seems to not have got any patches,so hopefully their next game will have some performance optimisations. Even in Fallout 4 where Intel is still ahead,Ryzen 2 registered a 16% improvement in minimums,so I suspect with Ryzen 3,if clockspeeds go up,and they can register some more IPC gains,it won't really matter anymore.

Edit!!

OTH:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr2B0RJd7Nc&

That time run around Swan's Pond is actually not too bad at all for the Ryzen 7 2700X. The Ryzen 7 1800X was definitely slower!!
 
Last edited:
asrock board unboxing here, seems asrock dont pamper the big reviewers so much as asus etc.


So like the z370 has 8 SATA, dual LAN, onboard big round power, reset, and diagnosis thingy as well. Plus decent VRM.
 
chrcoluk said:
This will make humbug go super hyper.

It certainly caught my attention.



source gamersnexus

So basically if you run a ryzen 2 200mhz or so below its limits, you can run the vcore "way" lower.

I would definitely take 0.3v of the vcore for -200mhz. I did it on my 8600k for a much lower vcore gain.
Click to expand...
As I predicted, a few pages back to humbug,
It's a good result for upto 4ghz, the power curve is sweet upto this point, it's just a shame it hits a brick wall after 4.2ghz.
 
Looking good from where I sit. I need to save the pennies for a half decent gfx card and then by the time I can afford the next bits we are probably going to be at 7nm and a massive hike from my 2400g.
 
Personally I think the Anand approach is correct, fully patched is the fair comparison but it clearly nobles the Intel performance a little. Any review which doesn't make specific mention of the patch status you would have to assume isn't patched and hence the results will favour Intel, a quick straw pole suggests this is a fair assumption. As always any review should be taken with a grain of salt, read enough though and you start to get a general consensus and be able to draw your own conclusions.
I haven't read all the reviews but from what I have, Intel and AMD seem about on par now in terms of price and performance averaged over all disciplines **EDIT factoring in the cooler AMD is actually the better value**. Which is best is down to an individuals specific use case.

Up until this release I was thinking my next CPU would be the 8400, possibly 8600, now I'm more inclined to go AMD.
 
Last edited:
This might explain it:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12625/amd-second-generation-ryzen-7-2700x-2700-ryzen-5-2600x-2600
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1185...-lake-review-8700k-and-8400-initial-numbers/5

AT didn't use high end cooling on the Intel parts,but this rack mount CPU cooler probably to simulate a stock cooler instead of high end cooling:

http://www.silverstonetek.com/product.php?area=en&pid=652

It was also used in their Core i7 8700K review.They used the stock AMD coolers for the Ryzen 2000 series.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
This might explain it:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12625/amd-second-generation-ryzen-7-2700x-2700-ryzen-5-2600x-2600
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1185...-lake-review-8700k-and-8400-initial-numbers/5

AT didn't use high end cooling on the Intel parts,but this rack mount CPU cooler probably to simulate a stock cooler instead of high end cooling:

http://www.silverstonetek.com/product.php?area=en&pid=652

It was also used in their Core i7 8700K review.They used the stock AMD coolers for the Ryzen 2000 series.
Click to expand...

Maybe.

The adaptive clock speeds (from both) consider cpu temperatures and it's beyond debate that a 2700X prism cooler is better than any intel stock or equivalent midget cooler.

Apparently AMD's XFR tries to boost if its below 60.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom