Official AMD Ryzen Benchmarks, Reviews, Prices, and Discussion

[Topweasel]

Sorry, not a bot.Something was wrong with forum not updating my webpage and just spinning forever not posting, and then bam posted 3 times.

Lol it's all cool it's just both in this thread and another it was 3 well spaced posts making the exact same statement.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Well honestly the OP of that thread/article was the most biased piece of crap I ever seen.
That's why I reacted so blatantly biased and trolled the AMD fanboys so bad it carried over to this website. So don't take the bait from another web site. Reporting posts as I type.
I thought that was obvious.

examples of his BS:

" And we all know how Intel's line-up has almost been torn apart by Ryzen's aggressive core and thread-count"

"all of these assert AMD's dominance in a pure price-performance ratio"

"Intel scrambling to respond to a launch that caught the blue giant squarely with its figurative pants down"

"over the now defunct and best-forgotten Bulldozer debacle was something Intel wasn't quite counting on. Intel had three choices: keep its stalwart posture with no price decreases on its line-up and see Ryzen CPUs flying off the shelves,"

"to handle Ryzen's core and thread dominance"

"those are all decisions that now show us how ridiculous it is that Intel is selling two-core, four thread i3 processors for the premium it has"

"enter a collision course with AMD's expected X399 platform, which again boast of higher core-counts - and probably better performance-per-watt - than Intel's offerings"

"which are supposed to bring Intel back in the mainstream processor game"

"
"I think "scrambling" is a more than fair description on the current Intel landscape."



The article was ridiculous and the OP was written by the News editor and staff of Techpowerup.
He interjected his biased opinions, and over the top wording the best he could to make Intel look like they have no Idea how to run a business.
I've posted there about 25 times in 6 years, and now you can see why.

If I wanted to stealth troll, you would not even know it till the report button was hit 4 times..
and this a little off topic so carry on with your thread,
thanks

Sounds like mostly facts to me... You ever think that you might be the problem, and not everyone else?

 

[alexruiz]

Ouch, they got him pretty bad. Kinda feel sorry for him.

Why sorry for him/her?
He/she is not in a quest for truth.
This person is to stir the pot, nothing more.

So over there at TPU he/she wrote that "would gladly pay $75 more to have the best performance", money no object, but this is the same person that hyped an i3 with a gtx 960 as the next coming of the ultimate gaming rig....

 

[psolord]

Thanks for the vid.

It's really sad to see the 1700, being such a strong chip performing so badly in some games. Even my Lynnfield i7-860 @ 4Ghz is faster than the 1700 @4ghz in Far Cry Primal and equal in Rottr and that with a GTX 1070 OC. wtf?






I am sorry but I cannot pay 750 euros to upgrade to a platform that will be slower than my 7 year old secondary system, not even in a couple of games. Also, that near to 60% performance delta in favor of the oc 6700k in Witcher 3, is a hit under the belt for me as well. Three of my favorite games performing so badly, coupled with the fact that G.skill verified that the DDR4-3200 Ram I got, would work at 2400Mhz on a Ryzen, seals it for me sadly.

The good thing is that Ryzen is here now and devs will take it into account from now on, so these oddball outliers will not be present in the next launch.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Also, that near to 60% performance delta in favor of the oc 6700k in Witcher 3, is a hit under the belt for me as well.

60% huh.

And hey that's at low res where Ryzen allegedly does poorly. With an Nvidia graphics card which . . . eh nevermind.

 

[Oddzz]

That video tells me nothing. If Ryzen is not at 3200mhz ddr or higher that is the issue. Things change with fast ram in Ryzens favor.

I'm not entirely sure about that as higher speed RAM also affects Intel systems. These benchmarks here show that both systems scale with higher speed: https://www.purepc.pl/procesory/test_procesora_amd_ryzen_7_1700_cenowy_rywal_core_i7_7700k?page=0,42

 

[Head1985]

I'm not entirely sure about that as higher speed RAM also affects Intel systems. These benchmarks here show that both systems scale with higher speed: https://www.purepc.pl/procesory/test_procesora_amd_ryzen_7_1700_cenowy_rywal_core_i7_7700k?page=0,42

Yeah intel with skylake/kaby is even more bottleneck by slow memory than ryzen..

 

[Oddzz]

Thanks for the vid.

It's really sad to see the 1700, being such a strong chip performing so badly in some games. Even my Lynnfield i7-860 @ 4Ghz is faster than the 1700 @4ghz in Far Cry Primal and equal in Rottr and that with a GTX 1070 OC. wtf?






I am sorry but I cannot pay 750 euros to upgrade to a platform that will be slower than my 7 year old secondary system, not even in a couple of games. Also, that near to 60% performance delta in favor of the oc 6700k in Witcher 3, is a hit under the belt for me as well. Three of my favorite games performing so badly, coupled with the fact that G.skill verified that the DDR4-3200 Ram I got, would work at 2400Mhz on a Ryzen, seals it for me sadly.

The good thing is that Ryzen is here now and devs will take it into account from now on, so these oddball outliers will not be present in the next launch.

I wouldn't read too much into the Tomb Raider benchmark, especially with DX12. It is clearly broken in its current state and you don't even need an AMD GPU to see that. Just lower the resolution like they did at nordichardware.se to see that something is wrong here when it comes to Ryzen (and all other AMD CPUs ^^):

 

[Head1985]

Dx12 +nv GPU is buged with ryzen.But other results are dx11.

 

[tamz_msc]

I wouldn't read too much into the Tomb Raider benchmark, especially with DX12. It is clearly broken in its current state and you don't even need an AMD GPU to see that. Just lower the resolution like they did at nordichardware.se to see that something is wrong here when it comes to Ryzen (and all other AMD CPUs ^^):

Look at the 5960X languishing at the bottom, with even the FX 8350 is faster!

This benchmark should be phased out, anybody still using this benchmark in DX12 would lose credibility from now on.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Look at the 5960X languishing at the bottom, with even the FX 8350 is faster!

That is a bit ridiculous, isn't it?

 

[zinfamous]

Sounds like mostly facts to me... You ever think that you might be the problem, and not everyone else?

you know that saying: "If you wake up in the morning, and meet an a$$hole--congrats, you met an a$$hole! If you spend all day meeting a$$holes, well, you're the a$$hole"

 

[tamz_msc]

That is a bit ridiculous, isn't it?

Yeah, that and my grammar, due to typing it out fast.

 

[krumme]

Yeah intel with skylake/kaby is even more bottleneck by slow memory than ryzen..

Do you guys have a brake?
In one post you whine about the dual ccx in another its this.
At least its consistent thread pissing.
Nice to have sites like purepc pl to give the "data" for it.

 

[PhonakV30]

Look at the 5960X languishing at the bottom, with even the FX 8350 is faster!

This benchmark should be phased out, anybody still using this benchmark in DX12 would lose credibility from now on.

6900K doesn't have this issue.How come?

 

[Rifter]

Why sorry for him/her?
He/she is not in a quest for truth.
This person is to stir the pot, nothing more.

So over there at TPU he/she wrote that "would gladly pay $75 more to have the best performance", money no object, but this is the same person that hyped an i3 with a gtx 960 as the next coming of the ultimate gaming rig....

I know, its sad really. I just wish i could put them on ignore for the whole internet not just anandtech lol

 

[Topweasel]

6900K doesn't have this issue.How come?

If I had to guess which is bad. The 6900k was run with an old driver version. At least that was what I was thinking till I saw the i3 performance.

The rule of thumb here and this will have a bunch of people spouting its the developers or here is some other ancient benchmark at super high resolutions that say otherwise. But DX12 scales fine on AMD GPU's with more cores on most DX12 games. It's problem is that AMD cards are so far behind Nvidia that it is really difficult to not GPU bottleneck a test with any current day CPU. DX11 on NVIDIA actually scales better than AMD on cores because 11 isn't nearly as MT and Nvidia uses a software scheduler for the card. This puts a higher work on the CPU, but now the Nvidia driver can schedule as many threads for this as they want. DX12 does a lot of this by default meaning the CPU scheduling just becomes CPU overhead. Not the end of the world. I think to maximize performance and remove this "overhead" or at least as far as being able to measure it they capped it to a standard i7 implementation (4c8t) and anything more than that sees both the overhead and generally has a lower clock. Compared to the 7k series also usually lower IPC.

On top of that Rise of the Tomb Raider can be wildly different between runs on the same setup even one right after another all on the included benchmark tool. Which means that if you aren't doing multiple tests and removing outliers the numbers are useless.

So basically the 5960 is both slower clock, lower or nearly the same IPC, has to deal with DX12 overhead, doesn't get to use all the cores, and Tomb Raider in general is a bad benchmark considering the in game benchmark has no consistency.

It's funny though Linus did a review of the R5 or 5xx series I forgot which, ran two tests, one was Tomb Raider and he didn't see the issue (because again on top of everything, RotTR is a crappy benchmark) and one other game. It was obvious in the benches on the second that the same thing was happening but he proclaimed it not to be an issue.

This is a really simple issue that hopefully Vega will bring to light. It should be easy to test for and doesn't even require a Ryzen. Take a 6900, 6950, or even a 5960. Something Intel with tons of cores. Don't touch clocks or memory. Use a 1080 or higher. Run DX11 at different core configs, then DX12 in games that support both. Compare numbers. The problem is there is a couple people that believe the issue is the games themselves. Vega will help that if good. Then you will have a comparison card that in theory would show proper core scaling in games.

 

[Ajay]

So question for all you denizens of this Ryzen thread: I heard that a new stepping was going to become coming out for Ryzen. Is this true? If so, any idea on when?

TIA!

 

[w3rd]

Black edition w/AIO water...

 

[.vodka]

So question for all you denizens of this Ryzen thread: I heard that a new stepping was going to become coming out for Ryzen. Is this true? If so, any idea on when?

TIA!

Supposedly,

http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-51#post-38817770

Can't confirm but

Zen HEDT CPU's are called Threadripper!
Each CPU will include 64 PCI-E Lanes!
It includes 4 CCX's.
Lower SKU(Probably 12/24) 140W TDP, Higher SKU (Probably 16/32) 180W TDP.
Socket will be an SP3 LGA
Platform's name will probably be X399
Chips will be B2 revisions.
32MB L3 Cache
ES's are 3,3 or 3,4 Ghz base and 3,7 Ghz Boost
It is aimed for Retail SKU to have 3,6 Base/4 Ghz Boost
ES's that are in the wild have 2500 CB R15.
Infinity Fabric can have a bandwidth up to 100GB/S
Announcement; COMPUTEX at Taiwan, sales will start after 2-3 weeks following COMPUTEX.

Wow

http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-52#post-38817812

From what i know B2 is more tuned and stable.

So, we should stay tuned for Computex... This guy got most things correct in the time until Ryzen launched IIRC.

I've also read throughout this thread at some point that this B2 stepping that will be used on HEDT X399 Ryzen will eventually be available on AM4. I'm not expecting Phenom II 940 -> 955 and C2 -> C3 improvement in so little time, but any improvement is welcome.

Next year we get Pinnacle Ridge, now we don't know if this is second generation Ryzen or what (I mean, it still lists "Zen" cores, not "Zen 2" or whatever they decide to call second gen Zen). Logic would tell you that it's second gen Ryzen.. but who knows.

 

[bakyt115]

http://support.amd.com/TechDocs/54945_PPR_Family_17h_Models_00h-0Fh.pdf

Processor Programming
Reference (PPR)
for AMD Family 17h
Model 01h, Revision B1
Processors

 

[Ajay]

Supposedly,

http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-51#post-38817770

http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-52#post-38817812

So, we should stay tuned for Computex... This guy got most things correct in the time until Ryzen launched IIRC.

I've also read throughout this thread at some point that this B2 stepping that will be used on HEDT X399 Ryzen will eventually be available on AM4. I'm not expecting Phenom II 940 -> 955 and C2 -> C3 improvement in so little time, but any improvement is welcome.

Next year we get Pinnacle Ridge, now we don't know if this is second generation Ryzen or what (I mean, it still lists "Zen" cores, not "Zen 2" or whatever they decide to call second gen Zen). Logic would tell you that it's second gen Ryzen.. but who knows.

Thanks! I pretty much figured the Zeppelin B2 stepping would be mainly bug fixes for stability/errata cleanup with Naples due end of summer (plus, hopefully, some tweaks to the IMC) I was hoping it would be out sooner. I'm probably going to build a Skylake-X or Ryzen system by the end June (would do it now, but SKX isn't out and Ryzen is still having too many teething problems for my comfort). And yes, @OrangeKhrush has definitely been on the ball vis-a-vis Ryzen.

 

[formulav8]

XDA Takes on Ryzen: In-Depth Look of AMD’s New Processors On the Linux Side

 

[Markfw]

XDA Takes on Ryzen: In-Depth Look of AMD’s New Processors On the Linux Side

Well, first off, they gimp the Ryzen, and put faster memory in the 6700, not even the PC3200 that they put in the 6700 ! Let alone on the newer bios, you might get 3600 to run, like other benchmarks,. And they couldn't even get 4 ghz like many of our members get ? This review bites. But they still gave a few kudos to Ryzen

 

[formulav8]

This review bites. But they still gave a few kudos to Ryzen

I'm only a simple messenger buddy, nothing more, nothing less. I just recall others caring about Linux. Since this is a review thread, I posted a simple review link. But still, they did not review as thorough as Phoronix seems to have did.