• 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" ?

You must have the reactions of a ninja to need 190fps :eek:

More seriously I did notice an improvement going from a 60hz screen to a 144hz screen.
He's talking about Cinebench scores not FPS.

The ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate includes a 10GbE port. About time for a mainstream (albeit top-end) motherboard!
 
Really wish Supermicro would put out an AM4 workstation board - I can't help but feel that way to much time / effort / money is being put into the look of the boards by the current lot, they are all very "gamery"
Indeed.
It feels like almost all motherboards are made to scream: Made for tasteless more money than sense gamers.
 
Lets face it Frostbite engine been BEST MULTI GPU and MULTI CORE engine for last hmmm 5-6 years ??
If all engines ware so good ryzen and Xfire/SLI would deiver epic fps.

Sadly Its not the case not in 7/10 games or so.

Other thing is that 4770k ware plain **** clockers since intel binned them for 4790 DC if You dont remember.

TBH better would be comparing 6600k vs 1700x gotta remember 4770k was FOUR YEARS OLD when 1700x came out !!!!


TL:TR
Ryzen will always shine in games that can make use from 12/16 threads and will be crushed in games that can make use from more than 8 threads. And thats a FACT for productivity Ryzen wins thats why I got one:

Cant do this on 4 core intel even on 5820k could not do this :)
I'm very happy with Ryzen but if I could afford Binned 5.1 8700k platform I would go for it :)

A little incoherent but I get the drift.
Firstly I only really play BF and I was upgrading from an old platform. I would not be upgrading to an old i5 in any case.

From the link you can see that the 1700x handily beats the old i7 on the 8 thread BF, whilst delivering massive gains in productivity, which was the point.

People go on about intel being the better gaming cpu, and they're right. But the Ryzen is still a good gaming processor. Especially when coming from an older platform
 
The 2700x should tempt a lot of people including myself. At 4.2 all core it will likely offer me 10% extra or more in any single core scenario and well over double in anything heavily multi threaded.
 
You must have the reactions of a ninja to need 190fps :eek:

More seriously I did notice an improvement going from a 60hz screen to a 144hz screen.

meant to say single thread performance in cinebench , but yea i play games that require fast single thread that benefit from it (also ruining 1440 144hz )
 
Last edited:
I don't think you can get unbuffered DIMMs in 32GB yet - only Registered DIMMS, no AM4 or TR4 boards have been released yet that support these AFAIK

Some boards support ECC - but its very hit and miss on AM4 (Asrock PRO series seems to be the best bet for this)

Not found a board yet with IPMI

And I've only seen TR4 boards with PCIE Bifurication - not seen any AM4 ones advertising this yet?

The problem with AM4 is unless someone makes a really specialised board you will be limited 4 slots and very high density memory qualification and the cost will probably make a 8/16 slot TR4 or EPYC system look a lot more attractive.

Most of the AM4 boards seem to support ECC.

I've got a couple of ASRock boards that support Bifurication.
 
My ASRock board in sig can do 8GbE. Was on the pricey side of the AM4 boards though.
Not 8GbE (which doesn't exist :p) but 2.5GbE and 5GbE, which are relatively new standards to allow for older copper infrastructure that cannot support 10GbE to support faster than 1GbE. I think that ASRock board is the only one to have anything faster than 1GbE; despite the fact that its' a high end board, the cost is worth it if you want faster than 1 Gb/s networking because the cheapest standalone PCIe cards are still nearly £200.

I doubt my wiring can support 10GbE but anything that supports at least 5GbE would be nice.
 
Not 8GbE (which doesn't exist :p) but 2.5GbE and 5GbE, which are relatively new standards to allow for older copper infrastructure that cannot support 10GbE to support faster than 1GbE. I think that ASRock board is the only one to have anything faster than 1GbE; despite the fact that its' a high end board, the cost is worth it if you want faster than 1 Gb/s networking because the cheapest standalone PCIe cards are still nearly £200.

I doubt my wiring can support 10GbE but anything that supports at least 5GbE would be nice.

No I can get 8GbE transfers over a 10GbE network. It's just a little slower than a system with a 10GbE Intel Tbase card. I think the Aquanita 5GbE chip is produced from the failed 10GbE.
 
No I can get 8GbE transfers over a 10GbE network. It's just a little slower than a system with a 10GbE Intel Tbase card. I think the Aquanita 5GbE chip is produced from the failed 10GbE.
Hmm that's interesting but I don't understand how that'd work. It would have to support the 10GbE standard to go above 5 Gb/s, which the chip isn't meant to support. What does your link actually say it's connect at, 10 Gb/s?
 
Not 8GbE (which doesn't exist :p) but 2.5GbE and 5GbE, which are relatively new standards to allow for older copper infrastructure that cannot support 10GbE to support faster than 1GbE. I think that ASRock board is the only one to have anything faster than 1GbE; despite the fact that its' a high end board, the cost is worth it if you want faster than 1 Gb/s networking because the cheapest standalone PCIe cards are still nearly £200.

I doubt my wiring can support 10GbE but anything that supports at least 5GbE would be nice.

10Gb ethernet cards are now available new for £90ish in PCIEx4
Asus make one for around that money too

Edit:
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asus-xg-c100c-10gbase-t-pcie-network-adapter-nw-10j-as.html
 
Hmm that's interesting but I don't understand how that'd work. It would have to support the 10GbE standard to go above 5 Gb/s, which the chip isn't meant to support. What does your link actually say it's connect at, 10 Gb/s?

Yeah 10 gigabit, but never seen it hit the full speed. Could possibly be throttling/thermal/power thing. Could also be the SoC connection too I suppose.
 
Yeah 10 gigabit, but never seen it hit the full speed. Could possibly be throttling/thermal/power thing. Could also be the SoC connection too I suppose.

I've tested a few cards now, not seen any with an ASMedia Aquantia chip achieve more than 8Gb peak

The Intel (x570 iirc) does 10 Gb as advertised, but costs a lot more.

Edit: Aquantia
 
Last edited:
I've tested a few cards now, not seen any with an ASMedia chip achieve more than 8Gb peak

The Intel (x570 iirc) does 10 Gb as advertised, but costs a lot more.

So it could a limitation of the X370 chipset? Would make sense I suppose. Not that I'm fussed as I was only expecting 5GbE away.
 
So it could a limitation of the X370 chipset? Would make sense I suppose. Not that I'm fussed as I was only expecting 5GbE away.
I don't think so - would need to see the block diagram for the mobo, I just dont think the chips on these cheaper 10GbE Nics are as good as the Intel or Mellanox alternatives.

The 10GbE NICs I tested were all on a PCIE slot directly connected to the CPU - and I've just corrected my post, its not ASMedia who are producing the chips on the NICs its Aquantia
 
Back
Top Bottom