Official AMD Ryzen Benchmarks, Reviews, Prices, and Discussion

[Dygaza]

Some of the smaller or independent guys probably have their own 7700k for personal use but can't afford or get access to a 6900k just for the sake of being able to benchmark a product that few people will actually buy. Also, from other reviews, we've seen that the Intel 6, 8, and 10 core CPUs typically don't do any better than the 7700k so it's good enough. Add in that the 1700X is close in price and you have a pretty good reason to compare them for that reason alone. A 1700 is even cheaper and probably some of the best value you can get if you want an 8 core rig and have no qualms about overclocking. Maybe the R5 chips change that value proposition, but if all you care about is the best possible gaming CPU without concerns related to streaming, etc. then you have to compare it to the 7700k anyhow as that's the previous/current performance king.

Yes, but this is a bit out of the context. Recent discussion was that Nvidia driver doesn't work that well under DX12 (especially on ryzen). If you make test between I7-7700k and Ryzen, you are testing driver stack in different conditions (8 fast threads versus 16 slower threads). Same with crossfire vs single card tests, where you run different codepath alltogether under multigpu (and not even mentioning adding extra thread for 2nd video card).

 

[Rifter]

I find it amusing that where we were, 5-7 months ago, thoughts of comparing (what would become known as) Zen 7 and even 5 to 6700K (in games and relevant tasks) were considered not only to be a potential staggering achievement for AMD, but outright poppycock and wizardry.

And here we are...everyone is watching this thing battle with the 7700K and, for some reason, finding fault with these chips when they don't outright beat that in every test. Whatever happened to the 6700k? Not to mention the 8/16 thread intel beasts and their now complete obsolescence.

Amazing.

Yeah, but fanboys will be fanboys, I knew this was going to happen as soon as the trustworthy leaks started coming out.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

I was telling people that Zen would fall between Haswell and Broadwell-e for like a year, but people didn't want to hear it. They thought sandy and ivy bridge.

Then we started to see that was coming true, and I told them the top end sku would be at most $600, but they didn't want to hear that either. They thought it would be $800!

A sense of urgency to defend one's purchases mixed with a touch of fanboyism will cloud anyone's judgement.

 

[Ajay]

I find it amusing that where we were, 5-7 months ago, thoughts of comparing (what would become known as) Zen 7 and even 5 to 6700K (in games and relevant tasks) were considered not only to be a potential staggering achievement for AMD, but outright poppycock and wizardry.

And here we are...everyone is watching this thing battle with the 7700K and, for some reason, finding fault with these chips when they don't outright beat that in every test. Whatever happened to the 6700k? Not to mention the 8/16 thread intel beasts and their now complete obsolescence.

Amazing.

Well, originally AMD was saying a 40% IPC lift over EX. The 52% lift they achieved was truly a game changer - that, and the price for the 8-core models!

 

[zinfamous]

I was telling people that Zen would fall between Haswell and Broadwell-e for like a year, but people didn't want to hear it. They thought sandy and ivy bridge.

Then we started to see that was coming true, and I told them the top end sku would be at most $600, but they didn't want to hear that either. They thought it would be $800!

A sense of urgency to defend one's purchases mixed with a touch of fanboyism will cloud anyone's judgement.

yeah, buyer's remorse tends to be a big part of it in my experience. Jumping on Intel prior to Zen release probably stings. I know that when I do things, I just stay away from tech forums for at least 2-3 years, so as to remain blissfully ignorant of my terrible decisions.

 

[SunburstLP]

I find it amusing that where we were, 5-7 months ago, thoughts of comparing (what would become known as) Zen 7 and even 5 to 6700K (in games and relevant tasks) were considered not only to be a potential staggering achievement for AMD, but outright poppycock and wizardry.

And here we are...everyone is watching this thing battle with the 7700K and, for some reason, finding fault with these chips when they don't outright beat that in every test. Whatever happened to the 6700k? Not to mention the 8/16 thread intel beasts and their now complete obsolescence.

Amazing.

You're absolutely right. I'm sure there's a large number of us quiet lurkers who have learned over the years that most tech talk on the 'net is just an exercise in shifting goalposts no matter who the players are. D3D vs OGL, D3D11 vs Vulkan/D3D12, 3Dfx vs everybody, USR vs Zoom, Intel vs AMD, Power vs Itanium, Mosaic vs Netscape etc. It's never going to stop. It's what people do because of our oddly tribal nature as humans.

I haven't been this excited about new tech since R300 or Athlon64. AMD pulled off something akin to Rodgers' last-minute hail-mary passes. It's not only exciting from a technical innovation standpoint, but the value proposition is just nuts.

 

[Zstream]

it took some bios updates but my msi b350 tomahawk now runs the 3200c16 corsair LPX just fine and it goes head to head with expensive x370 motherboards( no OC),although it was terrible with 1.0bios.

Installed the new bios and no luck. Should I take back that eVGA 3200 ram at microcenter or what?

 

[bakyt115]

https://translate.google.com/transl...jp/docs/column/kaigai/1053318.html&edit-text=

nice article about Infinity Fabric

 

[tential]

I find it amusing that where we were, 5-7 months ago, thoughts of comparing (what would become known as) Zen 7 and even 5 to 6700K (in games and relevant tasks) were considered not only to be a potential staggering achievement for AMD, but outright poppycock and wizardry.

And here we are...everyone is watching this thing battle with the 7700K and, for some reason, finding fault with these chips when they don't outright beat that in every test. Whatever happened to the 6700k? Not to mention the 8/16 thread intel beasts and their now complete obsolescence.

Amazing.

The SECOND I saw charts in the ballpark of the 7700k I was oversold. Are you kidding me? You're getting double the core/threads for that cash. If you don't need that, then get the intel processor. But for many of us... that's a DREAM. The i5 vs Ryzen 5 is hilarious to me. I'm interested in how this thing progresses, and definitely interested in how Ryzen + plays out.

I look at Ryzen as an EXTREMELY good sign of things to come regarding CPU competition. I don't understand how you can look at Ryzen as a bad thing no matter any of its shortcomings.
I do believe Ryzen has effectively made every processor below an i7 from intel pointless.

 

[Ajay]

I was telling people that Zen would fall between Haswell and Broadwell-e for like a year, but people didn't want to hear it. They thought sandy and ivy bridge.

Then we started to see that was coming true, and I told them the top end sku would be at most $600, but they didn't want to hear that either. They thought it would be $800!

It wasn't that we didn't want to hear that price, we just didn't think it made sense for AMD to sell that low. Clearly, AMD had different ideas.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

It wasn't that we didn't want to hear that price, we just didn't think it made sense for AMD to sell that low. Clearly, AMD had different ideas.

It made perfect sense. These cpus are fighting for the mainstream market. More cores vs More single threaded performance.

 

[lolfail9001]

It made perfect sense. These cpus are fighting for the mainstream market. More cores vs More single threaded performance.

What exactly is mainstream market?

Nah, Ryzen 7s are enthusiast chips on mainstream platform through and through. Can't say i do not like that, though.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

What exactly is mainstream market?

Nah, Ryzen 7s are enthusiast chips on mainstream platform through and through. Can't say i do not like that, though.

pentium-7700k = mainstream

The only cpus intel has that are worth considering is the pentium & 7700k.

 

[lolfail9001]

pentium-7700k = mainstream

In Intel's classification at best.

Besides, even you put the admission that Ryzen 7s lies above mainstream market save the 1700. And imho, mainstream market ends at 7600k/locked 7700 and 1600X, 7700k and Ryzen 7s are all enthusiast tier CPUs stuck on mainstream platform. Granted, the way their strengths are aligned makes them all non-competitors at large.

 

[imported_jjj]

Full video for AMD's presentation in China last month. 1h 41 mins, you can skip the first 9.5mins.

Ashes of the Singularity GTX 1060 vs RX 480 DX11 vs DX12 on Ryzen 7 1800x

 

[imported_jjj]

Techspot looks at DX11 vs DX12 with RX 480 and GTX 1060 , 7700k and Ryzen but they test at same clocks and at low quality settings for w/e insane reason.
http://www.techspot.com/article/1374-amd-ryzen-with-amd-gpu/

Tomb Raider
DX11 Nvidia
7700k 157 AVG FPS
1800X 150 AVG FPS
DX12
7700k 167 up 6.4% vs DX11
1800X 146 down 2.6% vs DX11

Total War: Warhammer
DX11 Nvidia
7700k 255 AVG FPS
1800X 248 AVG FPS
DX12
7700k 244 down 4.3% vs DX11
1800X 190 down 23.4% vs DX11

The Division
DX11 Nvidia
7700k 258 AVG FPS
1800X 232 AVG FPS
DX12
7700k 262 up 1.6% vs DX11
1800X 230 down 0.9% vs DX11

BF1
DX11 Nvidia
7700k 200
1800X 200
DX12
7700k no data
1800X no data but well documented that Nvidia and DX12 are less that ideal in this title

Deus Ex
DX11 Nvidia
7700k 158 AVG FPS
1800X 144 AVG FPS
DX12
7700k 159 up 0.6% vs DX11
1800X 126 down 12.5% vs DX11

Ashes of the Singularity
DX11 Nvidia
7700k no data cos it's Techspot, they can't do anything right
1800X no data
DX12
7700k 95
1800X 103



Tomb Raider
DX11 Radeon
7700k 156 AVG
1800X 143 AVG
DX12
7700k 172 up 10.3%
1800X 161 up 12.6%

Total War: Warhammer
DX11 Radeon
7700k 217 AVG FPS
1800X 220 AVG FPS
DX12
7700k 248 up 14.3%
1800X 228 up 3.6%

The Division
DX11 Radeon
7700k 228
1800X 203
DX12
7700k 277 up 21.5%
1800X 275 up 35.5%

BF1
DX11 Radeon
7700k 200
1800X 189
DX12
7700k no data
1800X no data

Deus Ex
DX11 Radeon
7700k 148
1800X 136
DX12
7700k 148 flat vs DX11
1800X 138 up 1.5%

Ashes of the Singularity
DX11 Radeon
7700k no data
1800X no data
DX12
7700k 94
1800X 104

They test a few more games but not DX11 vs DX12
With valid data only from 4 games, we see
- with Nvidia the quad core sees a minimal gain overall when going to DX12 from DX11
- with Nvidia the octa core sees a large loss in performance across the board with the average at almost 10%
- with Radeon the quad core sees a large gain overall of over 10% when going to DX12 from DX11
- with Radeon the octa core sees an even larger gain but just slightly larger than the quad.

So without realizing ,Techspot does help prove Nvidia's issues with octa cores under DX12

One last note, can't quite tell is Total War: Warhammer was updated to the latest version that seems to fix scheduling issues with Ryzen. Its behavior with Radeon and DX12 might suggest that they don't use the newest version.

 

[CatMerc]

What exactly is mainstream market?

Nah, Ryzen 7s are enthusiast chips on mainstream platform through and through. Can't say i do not like that, though.

I guess by Intel's definition of mainstream and enthusiast. But seeing that AMD is planning a true HEDT platform with 16 cores, I guess AMD just said "screw that" lol

 

[CatMerc]

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&u=http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/column/kaigai/1053318.html&edit-text=

nice article about Infinity Fabric

Excellent find!

 

[Ajay]

It made perfect sense. These cpus are fighting for the mainstream market. More cores vs More single threaded performance.

Well, however you arrived at your prediction, you had a better sense of of the situation than the majority.

It makes sense when one realizes that AMD decided to use its engineering success to disrupt the market. IMHO, this is a strategic move - kudos to AMD's top executives.

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

I never expected Zen to be this powerful. I really thought we'd be looking at Ivybridge performance, higher TDP, and similar, and this from the forum's resident AMD fangirl. This has been an amazing and very pleasant surprise!

Also, watching the local Intel shills try so very hard to pretend they haven't gotten their heads handed to them is amusing. You know who you are (and so do the rest of us). Hopefully, though I won't hold my breath, this will smack the arrogance out of you.

 

[Rifter]

Techspot looks at DX11 vs DX12 with RX 480 and GTX 1060 , 7700k and Ryzen but they test at same clocks and at low quality settings for w/e insane reason.
http://www.techspot.com/article/1374-amd-ryzen-with-amd-gpu/

Tomb Raider
DX11 Nvidia
7700k 157 AVG FPS
1800X 150 AVG FPS
DX12
7700k 167 up 6.4% vs DX11
1800X 146 down 2.6% vs DX11

Total War: Warhammer
DX11 Nvidia
7700k 255 AVG FPS
1800X 248 AVG FPS
DX12
7700k 244 down 4.3% vs DX11
1800X 190 down 23.4% vs DX11

The Division
DX11 Nvidia
7700k 258 AVG FPS
1800X 232 AVG FPS
DX12
7700k 262 up 1.6% vs DX11
1800X 230 down 0.9% vs DX11

BF1
DX11 Nvidia
7700k 200
1800X 200
DX12
7700k no data
1800X no data but well documented that Nvidia and DX12 are less that ideal in this title

Deus Ex
DX11 Nvidia
7700k 158 AVG FPS
1800X 144 AVG FPS
DX12
7700k 159 up 0.6% vs DX11
1800X 126 down 12.5% vs DX11

Ashes of the Singularity
DX11 Nvidia
7700k no data cos it's Techspot, they can't do anything right
1800X no data
DX12
7700k 95
1800X 103



Tomb Raider
DX11 Radeon
7700k 156 AVG
1800X 143 AVG
DX12
7700k 172 up 10.3%
1800X 161 up 12.6%

Total War: Warhammer
DX11 Radeon
7700k 217 AVG FPS
1800X 220 AVG FPS
DX12
7700k 248 up 14.3%
1800X 228 up 3.6%

The Division
DX11 Radeon
7700k 228
1800X 203
DX12
7700k 277 up 21.5%
1800X 275 up 35.5%

BF1
DX11 Radeon
7700k 200
1800X 189
DX12
7700k no data
1800X no data

Deus Ex
DX11 Radeon
7700k 148
1800X 136
DX12
7700k 148 flat vs DX11
1800X 138 up 1.5%

Ashes of the Singularity
DX11 Radeon
7700k no data
1800X no data
DX12
7700k 94
1800X 104

They test a few more games but not DX11 vs DX12
With valid data only from 4 games, we see
- with Nvidia the quad core sees a minimal gain overall when going to DX12 from DX11
- with Nvidia the octa core sees a large loss in performance across the board with the average at almost 10%
- with Radeon the quad core sees a large gain overall of over 10% when going to DX12 from DX11
- with Radeon the octa core sees an even larger gain but just slightly larger than the quad.

So without realizing ,Techspot does help prove Nvidia's issues with octa cores under DX12

One last note, can't quite tell is Total War: Warhammer was updated to the latest version that seems to fix scheduling issues with Ryzen. Its behavior with Radeon and DX12 might suggest that they don't use the newest version.

This seems truly amazing to me. Nvidia has always gone after the flagship tier of cards, always having a super powerful top end card from each generation, so why would they gimp their cards when paired with top tier flagship high core count CPU's? this make literally no sense to me.

I can tell you one thing this is making vega look better for 8 core owners vs 1080Ti.

 

[RiverRicer]

I picked up a 32GB (4x8GB) kit of DDR4-3200 CL14 (i.e. Samsung B-die) off of Newegg for $265 yesterday. I think it's supposed to come on Saturday so I may end up being able to do a memory compatibility/overclocking test on four motherboards with whatever the latest beta BIOS is for that particular board.

CPUs:
Ryzen 7 1800X
Ryzen 7 1700

Motherboards:
MSI B350M Gaming Pro
Gigabyte AB350 Gaming 3
Gigabyte AX370 Gaming K7
Asrock X370 Taichi

RAM:
G.Skill Ripjaws V 2x8GB DDR4-2400 CL15 (dual rank)
G.Skill Ripjaws V 2x8GB DDR4-2400 CL15 (single rank) <-- this was as low as $50 at one point, I paid $55
G.Skill TridentZ 2x8GB DDR4-3400 CL16 (dual rank)
G.Skill FlareX 2x8GB DDR4-3200 CL14 (single rank, Samsung B-die) <-- best perf, worst perf/$
G.Skill Ripjaws V 4x8GB DDR4-3200 CL14 (single rank, Samsung B-die) <-- theoretically same ICs as FlareX

Any particular combinations people are interested in seeing? I've thought about mixing and matching FlareX and Ripjaws V just to see if that combo works, as theoretically both use the same ICs...

Well, you seem to have an embarrassment of technological riches. Let me help you with that. Just send me the R 1700, Taichi, and the Flare X and I'll test those.

 

[hotstocks]

Forget Vega, no fanboi here. Nvidia just needs to get it's sh!t together. They will see all the Ryzen sales and then improve their drivers for Ryzen. They won't want to lose the business. They really only had to cater to Nvidia for years, as AMD never had the top end card.

 

[inf64]

Ryzen 1800X vs 7700K (quicksync included) vs 6900K gaming + streaming performance analysis:

Spoiler

Ryzen wins

 

[unseenmorbidity]

This seems truly amazing to me. Nvidia has always gone after the flagship tier of cards, always having a super powerful top end card from each generation, so why would they gimp their cards when paired with top tier flagship high core count CPU's? this make literally no sense to me.

I can tell you one thing this is making vega look better for 8 core owners vs 1080Ti.

Because Nvidia doesn't have the hardware to properly support DX12 yet. Their driver solution creates CPU overhead, which in turn nets less performance on slower CPUs. They cannot fix this. They need to create a new architecture that can better support low level APIs.

So, instead they use their money and influence to delay the adoption of low level APIs, like DX12 and Vulkan.

Which actually makes the situation even worse for 8 core CPUs. Because their best way to hurt AMD's GPUs in DX11 is to overload one thread. And that's exactly what they do when they "help" port games to the PC and load it with gimpworks. This of course also hurts their own consumes, particularly people with slower CPUs, but as long as it hurts AMD more it's an acceptable outcome.