• 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 2600 vs Core i9 7800X in 37 game benchmark.


We can play HEDT game also :)
8348_08_intel-core-i9-7980xe-7960x-cpu-review.png

8348_08_intel-core-i9-7980xe-7960x-cpu-review.pngp



Normal for normal desktop ryzen on CB cant be beated BUT [email protected] is around 1670 range very nice score for 6 core cpu :)

And there is this:
97976.png



If someone is using Single core performance apps and games like MMO's Ryzen is not best choice.
 
We can play HEDT game also :)
8348_08_intel-core-i9-7980xe-7960x-cpu-review.png

8348_08_intel-core-i9-7980xe-7960x-cpu-review.pngp



Normal for normal desktop ryzen on CB cant be beated BUT [email protected] is around 1670 range very nice score for 6 core cpu :)

And there is this:
97976.png



If someone is using Single core performance apps and games like MMO's Ryzen is not best choice.

If you're going to include the 8700K overclocked scores you also cannot ignore the same for Ryzen, which scores about 1950, even the £160 2600 scores about 1500, that's closer to the 5.1Ghz 8700K than it is to the 2700X.

There is no such thing as a game that only uses one core, not since about 1999, the only way you can judge a CPU's gaming performance is by doing actual gaming benchmarks, there are 37 of them on page one of this thread.
 
Last edited:
I haven't done the maths on this yet but here is the thing, Coffeelake vs Ryzen 1###

Intel 8### series ST +7% IPC
Intel 8### series MT +3% IPC

We tested that ^^^^^

Ryzen 2### has gained significant IPC over Ryzen 1###, that was inevitable, brand new architecture and platform, a lot of low hanging fruit, the point being the only thing Intel have now is Mhz, IPC? no.
And because the IPC is lower on Skylake-X what you end up with is higher IPC on Ryzen 2###, to the tune of about 10%.
This is why we are seeing these results where even in games like World of Tanks and GTA-V Intel in the form of Skylake-X at least are no longer faster, certainly not clock for clock. i'll do the maths later.

And you know what, for the first time since about 2004 AMD may beat Intel outright in 2019 with Zen 2.
 
Ryzen "2" hasn't really gained much IPC at all (I've literally went from a 1700 to a 2700 at the same clocks). It's ~3%. Ryzen "2" is AMD's Kabylake.

Everytime you post about Ryzen is gets faster.

I'm happy to compare my 2700 Cinebench single core at 3.8GHZ with my RAM @ 2933MHZ (Or whatever it is) versus your 1600 at 3.9GHZ and your RAM at 3066MHZ and I expect to come second.
 
jzMV08N.png

7800-X Average FPS 171 (100%) 4.6Ghz (100%)
2600 Average FPS 168 (98%) 4.2Ghz (91%)

So with 9% higher clock the 7800X is 2% faster, a difference of about 7% IPC to the 2600.

Yes its give and take some in this review and this is an accumulative result however there are a lot of games in it that are traditionally Intel heavy, or at least they used to be vs Ryzen 1###.
For example:
Farcry Primal
GTA-V
PUBG
World of Tanks

gnUF6IF.png

qoVQHUp.png

Xu5K7ix.png

uXwiz60.png

Ryzen 2### vs Coffeelake

8700K all core boost 4.3Ghz, single core boost 4.7Ghz

MT
2600X @ 4.1Ghz (100%) score 1439 (100%)
8700K @ 4.3Ghz (105%) score 1419 (98%)
At 105% clock speed vs Ryzen 2### the 8700K scores 98%, a difference of +7% IPC to Ryzen 2###

ST
2600X @ 4.1Ghz (100%) score 176 (100%)
8700K @ 4.7Ghz (115%) score 198 (113%)
At 115% clock speed vs Ryzen 2### the 8700K scores 113%, a difference of 2% IPC to Ryzen 2###
BpB6vZV.png

@Martini1991 the numbers say Ryzen 2### gained 10% IPC, that's in line with what AMD said.

Edit: 159 at 3.9Ghz / 3066 ST
 
Last edited:
Surely if your a gamer your not going be buying an intel 7800x cpu or an AMD Ryzen cpu

A gamer going to be buying a 8700k...

If you're a hardcore 100% gamer probably specialising in high fps twitch games. For everyone else there is Ryzen ;)

In all seriousness though, if you're an average all rounder like the majority is worth sacrificing a few fps to get the other benefits of more cores.

I can see this being like to debate on do we need more than 4GB VRAM or 8GB of system RAM. We might not need it right now but I bet you'll be taking advantage of those cores well before your hardware is obsolete.
 
If you have a GTX 1080TI yeah, for anything less than that you're not gaining anything over a 2600 so i don't see the point in spending £160 more, a 2600 will net you the same performance with a GTX 1080 an an 8700K.
 
Would you be offended if i take an internet full of reviews as more factual than what you are about to do?

Well, I made the statement before I did the test.
I get 158, so I'm exactly as I thought.

Show me where AMD said Zen+ is 10%. You're the only one saying it. Based on my Cinebench there's really no IPC gain (Well, ~3%), which is what I thought before I ran the Cinebench.

Nothing I've seen has suggested Zen "2" has 10% IPC gain

EDIT : Show me a review where they compare a 1700/2700 (Or any Ryzen 1 versus "2") at the same clocks (With all the turbo stuff turned off). Otherwise it's not even close to proof. As surely the only way to make such a statement requires a review comparing Zen 1 and "2" at the exact same clocks with no clock speed differences.

EDIT 2 : Are you sure you're not getting confused about overall gain? 10% overall gain from say a 1700 to 2700 at stock settings is probably correct etc.

EDIT 3 : https://www.anandtech.com/show/12625/amd-second-generation-ryzen-7-2700x-2700-ryzen-5-2600x-2600/3

AMD say it's 3%.
 
Last edited:
Well, I made the statement before I did the test.
I get 158, so I'm exactly as I thought.

Show me where AMD said Zen+ is 10%. You're the only one saying it. Based on my Cinebench there's really no IPC gain, which is what I thought before I ran the Cinebench.

The difference between 3.8Ghz and 4.1Ghz is 8% yet your scoring 12% lower, you look at every review on the internet all Ryzen 2### score around 175 at around 4Ghz give or take slightly, i think you should ask what is different about your Ryzen 2700 that it seems slower than all others.
Against the rest of the internet i think you might understand that i don't take you singular result as fact above all others.

Show me where AMD said Zen+ is 10%. You're the only one saying it.

I miss read a slide, however again i have a whole internet of figures to go from.
 
EDIT : I don't know what's happening anymore. AMD's own words aren't enough.

But I'd still like to see a review where Zen 1 and "2" are compared at the same clocks. If there's anything where there's a 10% gain at the same clock it must be a very specific scenario (Or say a game that's not consistent in what it's actually rendering)
 
EDIT : I don't know what's happening anymore. AMD's own words aren't enough.

But I'd still like to see a review where Zen 1 and "2" are compared at the same clocks. If there's anything where there's a 10% gain at the same clock it must be a very specific scenario (Or say a game that's not consistent in what it's actually rendering)

Well this is how AMD arrive at 3%... look closely at this slide and look at my numbers....

aX7cQw9.png
 
Well this is how AMD arrive at 3%... look closely at this slide and look at my numbers....

aX7cQw9.png

Isn't that anandtechs graph, not AMD's.
AMD made the statement, Anandtech were double checking it?

End of the day, it's not 10% (Which is what I rebutted). Zen "2" is about as exciting as kabylake, but it's a very good option for anyone none zen or coffeelake owner.
 
Back
Top Bottom