AMD launches Zen+ 12nm Ryzen and X470 motherboards

[Christopher Bohling]

Might be true for those particular games but overall Intel is definitely going to be ahead.

Eh, it's not just a case of cherry picking games where Ryzen does well. We already knew that Civ VI was very good on Ryzen, but Rocket League and GTA V are two games where Ryzen 1000 series does notoriously poorly, and these benchmarks are showing ridiculous, unbelievable improvement in those titles. I'm probably one of the biggest Ryzen fanboys on this board but I'm very skeptical of these results.

 

[Topweasel]

For anyone interested in IPC numbers, my Tech Buyer's Guru review provides a look at IPC increases by clocking Zen, Zen+, Broadwell and X-Lake at 3.8GHz.

And I hate to say this, but AT clearly goofed up its gaming benchmarks. Results like those should have led to a publishing hold, but NDA deadlines called.

Not 100% sure this is the case. Looking through some of the reviews I wonder if A.) the auto overclock feature is being left on in some of the reviews and B.) several of them are using the box cooler with AMD CPU's while using something unlisted or at least in one of them a 280 rad AIO with the 8700k. We will probably need to let the dust settle a bit and see what the results are. I don't like the idea of defaulting to the one being off is at fault specially since out of the 4 reviews I have read they have been the most clear on testing parameters.

 

[Hitman928]

The following review locks the 2700x, 1700x, and 8700k all to 4 GHz and using the same RAM and compares with some very interesting results (8700k is the dark grey bars on the right of each grouping).

http://www.overclockers.com/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-and-ryzen-5-2600x-cpu-review/

 

[Anubis]

The following review locks the 2700x, 1700x, and 8700k all to 4 GHz and using the same RAM and compares with some very interesting results (8700k is the dark grey bars on the right of each grouping).

http://www.overclockers.com/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-and-ryzen-5-2600x-cpu-review/

thats some horrid color coding

 

[dacostafilipe]

Hardware.fr is also up. Still shows the coffeelakes as faster in gaming, but it does not matter really. From where I stand Intel and AMD are now equal.

https://www.hardware.fr/articles/974-19/indices-performance.html

Compared to my 1800X, the 2700X is +12% faster in applications and +10.6% in gaming.

Kinda nice for a refresh.

 

[Hitman928]

thats some horrid color coding

I agree, but at least they include tables in the review for the other benchmarks.

 

[AtenRa]

They're outliers actually.

Table finally got published.

That is how you review at default first, then you can OC both the CPU and Memory.

Amazing showing from Ryzen 2, at default it has nothing to fear from Intel offerings.
Now I would like to see a Core i5 8400/8500 on a B360 board with 2666MHz memory against the R5 2600 + 2933MHz memory on a B350/450

 

[Panino Manino]

I see nothing wrong with what Anandtech did, I wanted to see the two platforms tested at stock.

 

[dlerious]

They're outliers actually.

Table finally got published.

Typo there on 1st gen Ryzen - DDR3-2666?

 

[Mockingbird]

The Ryzen 7 2700X has managed to beat the Core i7-7820X across the board in games apparently.

 

[tamz_msc]

Hardware.fr published what could possibly be the most equal comparison(with DDR4 2400 CL15, Windows 10 Anniversary, hence no GPZ fix, with core parking disabled for Ryzen)

Overall a nice improvement, gaming performance is essentially at Haswell-E level.

 

[PotatoWithEarsOnSide]

One of the reviews referenced the Windows balanced power modes, with the latest generation working better without the Ryzen Balanced option set, unlike the first generation.
Is it possible that the reviews haven't all taken this into account?
The other thing I noted, probably from the same review actually, was that the gaming results looked awfully gpu bound. It was under the guise of real world usage though, which is forgivable though not a real reason to say its only marginally better than the first generation.
To me, it looks like Intel has a 7% IPC advantage, and ~15% greater scope for overclocking, though the AMD CPUs perform better at stock than previously (though just behind, though still incredibly competitive with Intel at stock), come with a cooler, cheaper platform, and generally much better for productivity workloads.
If anyone wanted competition in the CPU market, it's hard to say that it doesn't exist. Happy days.

 

[AtenRa]

The big difference between the AT review in comparison to the others is that they used the official memory from both manufacturers (2666MHz for Intel and 2933MHz for AMD) but also the very cheap Heat-Sink (Silverstone AR10-115XS) on the Intel processors.

Other Reviews use very expensive Air-coolers or even Water-cooling, making the Intel processors to increase their performance over the Ryzen 2 in many games. For example, the computer base review is using the default heat-sink for AMD but the NOCTUA NH-U14S with NF-A15 fans for Intel.

 

[psolord]

Yeah, let's hope AMD can do the same on the gpu side. I mean not just 15% improvement. To provide equal competition that is.

 

[s44]

So are PB2/XFR2 confirmed 400-series mobo only? Does B450 have a release date?

 

[lixlax]

Computerbase.de showing that with fast memory and manual tight timings the 2700X gets within a few percentages of 8700K (in games) with similar memory settings.
Overall it think its a decent refresh, but not really worth to upgrade from 1st gen Ryzen (unless you can go for more cores).

 

[Atari2600]

The big difference between the AT review in comparison to the others is that they used the official memory from both manufacturers (2666MHz for Intel and 2933MHz for AMD) but also the very cheap Heat-Sink (Silverstone AR10-115XS) on the Intel processors.

Well... if Intel choose not to ship their CPU with an adequate (or indeed, any) cooler - then the price point comparison is unfair to AMD. If they want the benefit of a $100 cooler, then include one with the CPU and price accordingly.

I fully agree with with initial test done completely and only at stock as far as both CPUs go. Then the variables of overclocking and cooling can be introduced.

 

[hasu]

Power consumption is as important to me as the processing power.

How come Intel, which is rated at a lower power, is dissipating more than AMD for just 6 cores? Does it have anything to do with GPU?

Total Package:
2700x = 109.66 (8 cores)
8700K = 120.09 (6 cores)

CPU Power consumption
2700x = 86.32 (8 cores)
8700K = 113.19 (6 cores)

 

[IEC]

Computerbase.de showing that with fast memory and manual tight timings the 2700X gets within a few percentages of 8700K (in games) with similar memory settings.
Overall it think its a decent refresh, but not really worth to upgrade from 1st gen Ryzen (unless you can go for more cores).

Indeed:
https://www.computerbase.de/2018-04/amd-ryzen-2000-test/7/

And with 8c16t versus 6c12t it becomes clear which one is the better overall processor if your tasks can make use of the extra threads.

Never mind the dreadful IOPS/disk performance penalty the most recent 0x84 microcode and OS updates brought to Coffee Lake.

 

[Anubis]

Power consumption is as important to me as the processing power.

How come Intel, which is rated at a lower power, is dissipating more than AMD for just 6 cores? Does it have anything to do with GPU?

Total Package:
2700x = 109.66 (8 cores)
8700K = 120.09 (6 cores)

CPU Power consumption
2700x = 86.32 (8 cores)
8700K = 113.19 (6 cores)

AMD TDP and Intel TDP are calculated and measured differently

 

[epsilon84]

The good:
*Productivity performance (as expected)
*Slight IPC increase
*Lower cache/memory latencies
*Better support for high frequency RAM with the X470 chipset

The bad:
*Overclocking headroom seems quite limited, 4.2GHz seems to be the limit for most chips
*Power consumption - the 2700X in particular, should not be rated at 105W TDP, as it can exceed 140W under certain loads.
*The 2600 only shipping with a Wraith Stealth - this will mean very limited overclocking headroom, forcing buyers to get the more expensive 2600X to get a realistic chance of a 4GHz overclock

 

[SPBHM]

it's interesting to compare the 2700X with the 7820X, clearly better gaming performance for AMD and small lead for Intel for MT at a much higher price... kind of a fail for Intel...

with the 8700K there is a clear lead for gaming, but... it's not that big most of the time, and MT the 2700X takes easily
I think both the 8700K and 2700X are valid at their price point... the 8600K is harder to justify against the 2600x

solid launch by AMD, it's hard to believe they only had Bulldozer for so many years.

 

[krumme]

it's interesting to compare the 2700X with the 7820X, clearly better gaming performance for AMD and small lead for Intel for MT at a much higher price... kind of a fail for Intel...

with the 8700K there is a clear lead for gaming, but... it's not that big most of the time, and MT the 2700X takes easily
I think both the 8700K and 2700X are valid at their price point... the 8600K is harder to justify against the 2600x

solid launch by AMD, it's hard to believe they only had Bulldozer for so many years.

Not to mention the price of a 7820x system.

 

[hasu]

The good:*Power consumption - the 2700X in particular, should not be rated at 105W TDP, as it can exceed 140W under certain loads.

AnandTech benchmark shows that the total power consumption at full load for the whole system is under 110 W for AMD. Why is this discrepancy?

 

[epsilon84]

it's interesting to compare the 2700X with the 7820X, clearly better gaming performance for AMD and small lead for Intel for MT at a much higher price... kind of a fail for Intel...

with the 8700K there is a clear lead for gaming, but... it's not that big most of the time, and MT the 2700X takes easily
I think both the 8700K and 2700X are valid at their price point... the 8600K is harder to justify against the 2600x

solid launch by AMD, it's hard to believe they only had Bulldozer for so many years.

Yeah, the 7820X is a fail due to price though, not necessarily performance. No one in their right mind should get Skylake-X for gaming, its clear to see the differences between ring and mesh bus right there.

The 2700X basically builds on the small MT lead the 1800X had over the 8700K into a more substantial lead, and gaming is still a clear Intel win despite the margin being reduced, sometimes significantly (see Far Cry Primal, for example)