Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,552
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Will wait for solid information before deciding. Still on a 3570k so could be a good upgrade.
-
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.
Who will build a Ryzen PC (computer)
- Thread starter cosmogenesis
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,028
- Location
- Billericay, UK
You are definitely correct there, Intel have held back on performance and will come back to challenge AMD.
Yes AMD are coming back hot with Vengeance but someone as Intel who has been ahead all this time will surely come out with something to combat it, in terms of prices and better performing CPU's
I myself have gone from a 8350 which I have had for 2 years or so and upgrade recently to a Kaby Lake 7600k so I wont be changing unfortunately as my current system is pretty OP
I don't think Intel have held back on performance they have just been focusing R&D into power efficiency and graphics performance on their mainstream lines. To get another substantial lead over AMD again in terms of performance it will take years of dedicated R&D and will also need AMD to mess up again, it's not something they can quickly remedy, their only option is to rely on their brand name or slash prices. Like it or not AMD will be a thorn in Intel's side for the next 3/4 years at the very least.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,480
- Location
- Planet Earth
I am on a Xeon E3 1230 V2/Core i7 3770,so I will see how the reviews look first,and then see the availability of decentish mini-ITX motherboards,and decide from there.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
WTF Cat i thought it was a day 1 purchase for you
Come on man you know you want a 1700X or 1800X
Lots of people wanting mITX motherboards...how come? Is it just a space thing? Surely a full or mATX tower will have much better cooling for overclocking and be more silent due to supporting larger fans than mITX cases? I know that the main aim for my next build will be to make it as close to silent as possible, I don't care how big the case is as long as it fits in my desk tower space.
I can imagine using mITX for HTPC style systems but we'll have to wait for Raven Ridge for that to be properly viable.
I can imagine using mITX for HTPC style systems but we'll have to wait for Raven Ridge for that to be properly viable.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,480
- Location
- Planet Earth
WTF Cat i thought it was a day 1 purchase for you
Come on man you know you want a 1700X or 1800X
I was always said I wanted a 4C/8T one to start with(but might consider a 6C/12T one),but I need to see how the mini-ITX motherboards pan out. If AMD don't have reasonable mini-ITX motherboards I might end up not getting Ryzen and having to stick with Intel. Its happened twice in the past already,when AMD had CPUs I wanted but they ignored the SFF market - one being the 95W Phenom II X6 1045T/1055T and the other being the Llano A8 CPUs.
I have primarily used SFF PCs as my main one since 2005 with Shuttle XPCs followed by mini-ITX builds - I don't actually like large PCs,and I don't tend to overclock that much nowadays too. Its why I like the sound of XFR TBH!!
If I had £250 for a case,I would have probably ordered one of those the moment they came out:
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/dan-cases-a4-sfx-mini-itx-gaming-case-black-ca-000-da.html
Edit!!
I have one of these cases:
http://www.eteknix.com/cubitek-mini-cube-mini-itx-chassis-review/
I tend to prefer aluminium cases too,but that is the largest one I have had for a very long time. Its not too bad for noise as I modded the case with acoustic foam.
Would love too but can't justify it yet, my 4670 still has plenty of life in it and would like to get another year or 2 out of it.
I'm really hoping that Ryzen will be a success at a reasonable price then possibly look at the next generation Ryzen chips which will hopefully be more refined.
I'm really hoping that Ryzen will be a success at a reasonable price then possibly look at the next generation Ryzen chips which will hopefully be more refined.
I'm a complete silent pc fanatic and have built silent 0db in small cases and larger ones using mitx so it's perfectly viable
Depends on overclocking performance, I can live with a slight (~5%) IPC deficit to Intel's best, but not if poor overclocking adds another 10-15% on top of it.
Intel must be hoping that poor overclocking limits will turn out to be Ryzen's Achilles heel to deter the likes of me switching back to AMD.
..but if they all seem to hit ~4.5Ghz, then a 6c 12t CPU for 7600K money will be mighty hard to resist.
Intel must be hoping that poor overclocking limits will turn out to be Ryzen's Achilles heel to deter the likes of me switching back to AMD.
..but if they all seem to hit ~4.5Ghz, then a 6c 12t CPU for 7600K money will be mighty hard to resist.
Just my 2p on the cores/threads for gaming debate, I think we need to consider the diminishing returns you get in the sense that it gets progressively harder to create efficient thread usage in games. This is because sooner or later you will get one thread being a bottleneck leaving other threads under utilised. For an 8 core cpu to be properly utilised that basically means your most intensive thread can require a maximum of 12.5% of the processing power. Sure you can offload the minor threads handling input, background processes bla bla onto other cores but sooner or later you hit an issue whereby the load is too unevenly distributed, whether that be rendering, physics, AI or whatever needing more than 'their share' of the power.
So while I would agree that developers are moving in that direction (taking advantage of parallel processing), it will be a slow march and with every core that gets added that just introduces an additional headache in terms of utilisation.
As has been the case for many years, I suspect spending an extra say £100 on the GPU will be of far more benefit for gaming than an extra £100 on the CPU (assuming you aren't at extreme ends of the market running a very cheap cpu or very expensive graphics card).
So while I would agree that developers are moving in that direction (taking advantage of parallel processing), it will be a slow march and with every core that gets added that just introduces an additional headache in terms of utilisation.
As has been the case for many years, I suspect spending an extra say £100 on the GPU will be of far more benefit for gaming than an extra £100 on the CPU (assuming you aren't at extreme ends of the market running a very cheap cpu or very expensive graphics card).
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
Cant see it happening, it would create a lot of controversy if they did, as ardent Nvidia fans would boycott AMD cpu's if they did. Would be an extremely bold move if they offered increase in performance if coupled with an AMD card, but you would get a lot of conspiracy theory "gimping" rumors and hence a boycott of the CPU by many.
I upgraded to a skylake i7 last black friday so will not be building a Ryzen system, but I am looking forward to a lively CPU subforum with a strong AMD offering in the gaming sector. I've still got a few of my old AMD processors in a drawer that gave me great performance years back and hope they smash it with Ryzen.
Not gimping, but it would be good if either could offload work more closely.
If Nvidia made CPU's!!
Back on Topic, still looking closely at 1700 / 1700X with Crosshair and G Skill 3200 about £750 I expect.
Sounds a bit too Nvidia-esk. Propitiatory graphics slot that Nvidia have to licence from AMD as payback for all the dirty stunts Nvidia pull
Imagine the Nvidia focus group meltdown.