Official AMD Ryzen Benchmarks, Reviews, Prices, and Discussion

[PPB]

Hopefully by the time they start testing the R1600 and below, they re-do the R1800 to see if new bioses or whatever, fixes up some of these problems.

Also, is Ryzen suffering in all games, or just some select ones?

What I am also interested in seeing is the debate between 6-8 cores vs 4 cores in gaming, using 6-8 cores from both AMD & Intel.

A few days ago, many people seemed convinced that 4 core had seen its best days and 6-8 cores were poised to take over. Is this still the view amongst these people?

For it to show, you need MP scenarios most likely. BF1 for example is night and day in CPU performance. The only BF1 bench I saw was on a controlled SP scenario. Here single threaded perf and clockspeeds will trump anything that is multithreaded oriented, even on Frostbite 3. But you go to Amiens 64P and you can hear a 4c/8t scream at 60-80fps scenarios on Mesh and Terrain quality on Ultra (most CPU demanding settings in the game).

 

[unseenmorbidity]

There's definitely something wonky going on.

Joker did testing showing 3.9GHz 1700 (lol 1800x) going neck and neck with 7700k @5GHz

 

[tamz_msc]

They will be the same on G4560 and 1800X, because GPU bottlenecks, man.

Sure if you're using a GTX 960

 

[USER8000]

Ryzen have HT bug in games -10-15% performance drop.
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/956-7/impact-smt-ht.html

The same problem is seen here:

How could AMD not spot this??

 

[Glo.]

Joker on Ryzen 7 1700(329$ CPU) vs 7700K@ 5 GHz.

Looks like results appear to be all over the place.

Looks like they took RyZen out of the oven a little too early?

Yep. It appears that biggest gripe we can say about this CPU is that it was released a bit to early. AMD released unfinished product.

If you look at scientific scores, transcoding, etc, its out of this world, considering its price. When look at gaming - what the hell?

Look at for example here. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951-10.html
How come this not translates into gaming? This is not marketing gimmick. Its real world performance, on par or faster than Broadwell-E.

Nothing interesting for gamers, tho.

 

[lolfail9001]

Sure if you're using a GTX 960

If you are using anything short of Titan XP, or actually drop settings.

 

[richierich1212]

Gaming results are weird but about right within the range to be expected. AMD's new architecture out of the gate is somewhere between Haswell and Broadwell IPC. That's puts AMD back on the map. We all knew before hand that the king of gaming was Kabylake.

Make no mistakes, AMD has a winner here.

 

[DarkKnightDude]

So the IPC is fine, but the memory latency is screwing over their gaming benchmarks?

 

[lolfail9001]

Yep. It appears that biggest gripe we can say about this CPU is that it was released a bit to early. AMD released unfinished product.

AMD literally pulled off AAA gaming industry with preorders for unfinished product.

You know, if i had invested a penny into early adoption, i would probably be pissed. But now? I am just entertained as all hell and have the best schadenfreude about memory latency.

 

[LTC8K6]

Yeah, the SMT gaming deal/problem seems very odd to rear it's head on launch day.
Hard to believe it was not resolved long ago.

 

[PPB]

It was good I did not preorder. The whole ram timings, clocks and bios updates daily is showing of something still to be ironed out. Even besides that, the procs are a home run. The performance is there, but it needs time before it is worth buying for me (and the lack of ITX makes it convenient, too).

 

[leoneazzurro]

If it depends on Windows scheduler, it's not AMD fault alone, it's Microsoft that has to work on Windows scheduler. But this happened also when Bulldozer launched, Windows needed a patch to properly allocate the subcores.

 

[tamz_msc]

If you are using anything short of Titan XP, or actually drop settings.

You actually want me to believe there are people who play at 4K with a Pentium and a Titan X Pascal?

 

[IEC]

Maximum OC Ryzen R7 1700 (3.9GHz) versus Maximum OC i7-7700K (5GHz):

1080p ultra:

1080p minimum FPS:

1440p ultra:

1440p minimum FPS:

Unless you are pairing a $60 GPU with your high-end CPU, it looks like Ryzen is perfectly competitive in high-end gaming.

 

[Glo.]

AMD literally pulled off AAA gaming industry with preorders for unfinished product.

You know, if i had invested a penny into early adoption, i would probably be pissed. But now? I am just entertained as all hell and have the best schadenfreude about memory latency.

Yep, me too. Thankfully I have not pulled the trigger .

I am not so sure about the idea that AMD pulled itself from gaming industry. I guess time will tell.

 

[BigDaveX]

Looks like Ryzen's more akin to Athlon XP than Athlon 64; Intel still holds the overall performance lead in most cases, but AMD's offering is still very competitive, especially considering the price, and can really whale on Intel's offerings given the right situation.

And hey, at least with Ryzen you don't need to worry about either crushing the CPU or causing it to barbecue itself by attaching the HSF incorrectly.

 

[tamz_msc]

Funny how the entire focus has shifted to gaming. The AT review would have you believe otherwise.

 

[richierich1212]

Agreed, it's the first thing that Intel will look to. Even then, Ryzen still looks comparable in gaming today. Even if they don't take the top of gaming benchmarks.

 

[FIVR]

Wow I guess that puts a nail in the "gaming monster" coffin for the 7700k. AMD faster at 3.9Ghz than KL at 5Ghz... Intel is screwed. Makes sense now why they are sending letters to reviewers and filing these threads with trolls...they're scared and they should be scared.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Gaming results are weird but about right within the range to be expected. AMD's new architecture out of the gate is somewhere between Haswell and Broadwell IPC. That's puts AMD back on the map. We all knew before hand that the king of gaming was Kabylake.

Make no mistakes, AMD has a winner here.

No one expected gaming perf to be this bad....

Hopefully this can be fixed, but amd totally just shit the bed in the pc market. First impressions are everything!

Even if they can fix it, all the intel fanboys won't look back now.

 

[PPB]

It's the new goalshift.

Even so, AMD did wrong getting Ryzen 7 out first and target it at gamers so they dont have to wait for Ryzen 5. I feel 1600X is 100% more suited for gaming than 1700 because of clocks alone, for example. At 260 bucks it will be a bargain and i5 will be soon forgotten.

 

[guachi]

With such a dichotomy of results between gaming and content creation (or other multi-threaded use) a buyer will really have to think hard about what is most important to him.

Gaming? Don't get Ryzen.
Mult-threaded use? Get Ryzen!

Though I hope we see more gaming results with current games and GPUs that people would typically be using like a 480, 1070, and 1080. Especially the 1080 as, eventhough I think it's a terrible deal no, people will likely keep their CPU for long enough to upgrade to 1080-like speed for a reasonable price.

 

[DarkKnightDude]

What is up with the benchmarks all over the place? Joker for example has R7 1700 matching up to a 5GHz 7700k in gaming performance but than his 1800X is struggling to match a 7350k in some games. BIOs issues?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Having skimmed the AT review; I'm freakin' impressed. I'm sure gaming will sort itself out - given the base performance they have to work with, there's probably some software/driver tweaks that need to happen. There are people to do that.

I won't be shopping for a year or two yet, but can't wait to see what they come up with in the "mere mortals" (~$200 CPU) desktop space for Ryzen 2. Wouldn't be surprised if it were my next PC.

(Do I have actually own one before I say that Ryzen is a stupid-sounding name, though?)

 

[LTC8K6]

Maximum OC Ryzen R7 1700 (3.9GHz) versus Maximum OC i7-7700K (5GHz):

1080p ultra:

1080p minimum FPS:

1440p ultra:

1440p minimum FPS:

Unless you are pairing a $60 GPU with your high-end CPU, it looks like Ryzen is perfectly competitive in high-end gaming.

I'm not sure how needing double the cores and threads at max overclocks to tie is all that competitive for the architecture, though. If we drop RyZen down to 4C/8T in this scenario, what does it look like?