Official AMD Ryzen Benchmarks, Reviews, Prices, and Discussion

[formulav8]

There is a video floating around ( thats NDA is supposed to expire 2nd mar) that explains it, XRF is only 100mhz boost if the CPU detects it still has head room, but it applies to both all core clock and single core clock.

Argg was hoping for a better algorithm than that. Oh well, if X had anything to do with XFR on CPU models, it wouldn't matter to me anyways.

 

[.vodka]

Well, it's first generation. Remember how first gen turbo on the i7 9XXs would boost by a bin or two at best? Lynnfield got that going much better on the same 45nm process, Sandy made it great, etc.

Zen's turbo works great, XFR is headroom above that. 100 extra MHz for free, why not? I was expecting more based on the marketing slide.. but well, it's a vague marketing slide. It's multiplier unlocked so I wouldn't care for it anyway.

I'd expect more out of the feature in future Zen generations either by a better 14nm process down the road or enhancements to the SoC/cores themselves.

 

[swilli89]

I see that, thanks. The article is still wrong in their claim, the say the previous record was 2410. That's why I said they were too lazy to fact check before they published.

But the headline still reads true despite one error in the article.

You know my friend you are a curious case. You have a team red icon, yet you are working full time on mitigating Intel's bad image in the thread discussing their bribes and threats with Dell, Acer and other OEMs, and you are questioning every single bit of good news that comes out about Ryzen.

 

[Enigma-]

So Canard PC just spoke about that the IMC in Zen is slow. I don't know if that's the entire truth as it shows pretty damn good bandwidth, but still high latency. I am having a hard time to believe AMD would fail bad on latency because the importance of naples and server/HPC/interconnect (xUMA/IF).

Indeed it existing some official info from ASUS rep's that some microcode/bios will solve this kind of or at least enhance the results. Still, it can only be better and if the IMC is stong with correct RAM/IC's we can eliminate this alot by tweak freq and timings by our own. AMD just showed Geil w./Samsung b'die's running 3400Mhz @ 1T, still not so impressive sub-timings.

 

[formulav8]

Well hopefully AMD won't have to do a recall like Intel did with SNB.

 

[zinfamous]

With the right motherboard and a semi decent cooler the 1231 will run at max turbo (3.8GHz) all day long under full load.

That said, I'll be upgrading my 1231 in a couple months once I see full reviews and the early issues get worked out.

I am in this very same boat.

I'm just patiently twittling my thumbs, waiting for mature benches of 1700X and 1600X after that is released, mature MoBos with BIOSes and, well, I have to wait for the mATX or ITX option (lol--I already bought the case...and that is it. so...backwards). So, I have a hard limit to when I can consider Ryzen, but everything is looking like my ~3+ year-old 1231 + 280X will get a very sweet new boost by the end of this year.

 

[Phynaz]

But the headline still reads true despite one error in the article.

Headline is incorrect. There are over 100 systems faster than the alleged 5.2Ghz Ryzen in the Cinebench database.

You know my friend you are a curious case. You have a team red icon, yet you are working full time on mitigating Intel's bad image in the thread discussing their bribes and threats with Dell, Acer and other OEMs, and you are questioning every single bit of good news that comes out about Ryzen.

This doesn't belong here, keep this nonsense in the other thread. And if you aren't questioning everything that comes from any company's marketing department, let alone unsubstantiated random Internet posts then your are either naive or dumb. Although I didn't see you getting upset when people questioned Intel's claims, so maybe there's a third reason.

Whatever, this conversation is at an end. I won't see any further replies from you

Insulting other members is not allowed.
Markfw
Anandtech Moderator

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Headline is incorrect. There are over 100 systems faster than the alleged 5.2Ghz Ryzen in the Cinebench database.



This doesn't belong here, keep this nonsense in the other thread. And if you aren't questioning everything that comes from any company's marketing department, let alone unsubstantiated random Internet posts then your are either naive or dumb. Although I didn't see you getting upset when people questioned Intel's claims, so maybe there's a third reason.

Whatever, this conversation is at an end. I won't see any further replies from you

You were just as wrong as they were, lol.

 

[cytg111]

..And if you aren't questioning everything that comes from any company's marketing department, let alone unsubstantiated random Internet posts then your are either naive or dumb.

That was uncalled for dude.

 

[looncraz]

Headline is incorrect. There are over 100 systems faster than the alleged 5.2Ghz Ryzen in the Cinebench database.

And not a single one of them is only eight cores (I checked).

 

[Teizo]

Zen's turbo works great.

Do you know this for sure? I only ask because all the tests done comparing Ryzen to their Intel counterparts were done at stock speeds with no turbo and a Ryzen chip turbo'd up to its max speed has not been shown to my knowledge. Intel's chips turbo by default and don't require any special settings.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Computerbase.de editor Volker (he´s the one testing their Ryzen 1800X sample) has been kinda chatty today and dropped a few new hints about the new CPU. https://www.computerbase.de/forum/showthread.php?t=1661545&page=78 The interesting bits today start at page 78 and keep on going the next 3 pages. i´ll skip the not so important posts, but there are 3 posts of interest^

https://www.computerbase.de/forum/showthread.php?t=1661545&page=78&p=19823813#post19823813 "yeah thats from the event, i kinda know that one^ The 2nd video at 19:40 contains the OC-presentation at 4.1 Ghz... and the crash - just for those of you who still believe in a OC-miracle. And that was with watercooling btw."

https://www.computerbase.de/forum/showthread.php?t=1661545&page=78&p=19824272#post19824272 In response to someone saying that there are 4,2Ghz all core OC-bundles beeing offered by various shops, the last sentence is the important one. Free translation (because weirdly written in german) "Other reviewers (like us) mostly also dont manage that level of OC with their Ryzen-samples. We are all doing the AMD bluescreen."

https://www.computerbase.de/forum/showthread.php?t=1661545&page=80&p=19824694#post19824694 "Ryzen´s power consumption has nothing to do with TDP, they are also above it. That the new big cooler is designed for 125W is not a coincidence, even if the TDP of the big R7 actually says 95W."

 

[.vodka]

Do you know this for sure? I only ask because all the tests done comparing Ryzen to their Intel counterparts were done at stock speeds with no turbo and a Ryzen chip turbo'd up to its max speed has not been shown to my knowledge. Intel's chips turbo by default and don't require any special settings.

Why wouldn't it?

We've seen the videos with live systems and task manager open, showing for example the R7 1700 boosting well up to 3.6-3.7GHz from 3.0GHz base. Check Linus' video for that.

Turbo disabled assures less variability for testing clock for clock performance, that's why you've seen tests like that so far... and because engineering samples used for those leaks were still in the tweaking and getting everything up to speed for launch phase.. one of those features needing tweaking was turbo.

Reviews will be done with turbo enabled since that's default behavior.

 

[PhonakV30]

Computerbase.de editor Volker (he´s the one testing their Ryzen 1800X sample) has been kinda chatty today and dropped a few new hints about the new CPU. https://www.computerbase.de/forum/showthread.php?t=1661545&page=78 The interesting bits today start at page 78 and keep on going the next 3 pages. i´ll skip the not so important posts, but there are 3 posts of interest^

https://www.computerbase.de/forum/showthread.php?t=1661545&page=78&p=19823813#post19823813 "yeah thats from the event, i kinda know that one^ The 2nd video at 19:40 contains the OC-presentation at 4.1 Ghz... and the crash - just for those of you who still believe in a OC-miracle. And that was with watercooling btw."

https://www.computerbase.de/forum/showthread.php?t=1661545&page=78&p=19824272#post19824272 In response to someone saying that there are 4,2Ghz all core OC-bundles beeing offered by various shops, the last sentence is the important one. Free translation (because weirdly written in german) "Other reviewers (like us) mostly also dont manage that level of OC with their Ryzen-samples. We are all doing the AMD bluescreen."

https://www.computerbase.de/forum/showthread.php?t=1661545&page=80&p=19824694#post19824694 "Ryzen´s power consumption has nothing to do with TDP, they are also above it. That the new big cooler is designed for 125W is not a coincidence, even if the TDP of the big R7 actually says 95W."

So according to him , AMD deceived us ?

 

[CentroX]

It has been long known that intel and amd measure tdp different. How is this a surprise.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

So according to him , AMD deceived us ?

You mean tdp? I believe amd defines it as a normal load. Benchmarking will consume more power.

 

[USER8000]

So according to him , AMD deceived us ?

Ryzen is an SOC - the CPU has full chipset functions,so what did he expect - don't some of these reviewers even bother to think before spouting stuff??

What is the bet,some review websites will try and isolate CPU power consumption instead of system power consumption to show it in a worse light??

 

[Glo.]

I suggest waiting for reviews before you will take out pitchforks. They are going out tomorrow.

 

[Mopetar]

That was uncalled for dude.

It kind of is though. I remember the pre-BD times in this forum when hype for AMDs new architecture was just as fevered. AMD even had someone from their marketing dept. (JFAMD) who posted regularly (he let everyone know about his job so it wasn't something shady) that further fanned the flames.

Phynaz was one of the few people calling out the stuff that smelled fishy without just throwing shade at AMD over everything as trolls are wont to do. I even argued with him about a few things and more often than not he was right because he wasn't caught up in the excitement or desire to believe only the best.

I've seen him post in other forums and be similarly dismissive of posts that are essentially naive or using rose tinted lens to view the world.

Perhaps it's specifically bad to call out someone, but there are a lot of people who seem to dismiss anything that could be bad. Also his post was a reply to one that basically insinuates that he's a shill so it's pretty easy to forgive him for responding in kind.

I've lurked enough threads to be reasonably convinced he's not some anti-AMD (or anything) shill. I just think he gets annoyed by people who drink too much Koolaid.

 

[USER8000]

I suggest waiting for reviews before you will take out pitchforks. They are going out tomorrow.

What's annoying is that some of these reviewers have an inability to actually understand the basics of the hardware they are given by companies and it is somewhat concerning.

I really hope some of the supposed pressure Intel is putting on reviewers is not manifested in "misunderstandings" of some basics.

The CPUs in the X99 platform have a separate southbridge which handles USB,SATA,etc. Ryzen is a SOC which has the southbridge as part of the CPU itself.

So no wonder it might dissipate a bit more heat - there is simply more under the hood when compared to the equivalent X99 CPUs.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Real reviews come tomorrow?

 

[USER8000]

Real reviews come tomorrow?

Thursday.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

It kind of is though. I remember the pre-BD times in this forum when hype for AMDs new architecture was just as fevered. AMD even had someone from their marketing dept. (JFAMD) who posted regularly (he let everyone know about his job so it wasn't something shady) that further fanned the flames.

Phynaz was one of the few people calling out the stuff that smelled fishy without just throwing shade at AMD over everything as trolls are wont to do. I even argued with him about a few things and more often than not he was right because he wasn't caught up in the excitement or desire to believe only the best.

I've seen him post in other forums and be similarly dismissive of posts that are essentially naive or using rose tinted lens to view the world.

Perhaps it's specifically bad to call out someone, but there are a lot of people who seem to dismiss anything that could be bad. Also his post was a reply to one that basically insinuates that he's a shill so it's pretty easy to forgive him for responding in kind.

I've lurked enough threads to be reasonably convinced he's not some anti-AMD (or anything) shill. I just think he gets annoyed by people who drink too much Koolaid.

Odd, because he is saying some seriously questionable stuff right now...

 

[USER8000]

I think it is also concerning all of a sudden,Scan offering 4.2GHZ R7 1800X bundles is some sort of lie. Scan are very well known in the UK as one of the better known DIY retailers. They would not be offering bundles if they thought the CPUs would not reach that speed. For instance their Core i7 6900K bundles are at 4.2GHZ which is a few hundred mhz below the average overclock on HWBot,which is probably a safety margin.

Gibbo over on Overclockers UK said their R7 1700 will hit between 3.9GHZ to 4.1GHZ and that is the worst bin of the trio being launched.

Also the continued fake news about Ryzen having a poor memory controller - even though it seems to run 3.4GHZ memory. Not quite Intel levels - but Intel only has validated the memory controller at upto 2400MHZ and anything above that is not guaranteed by Intel at all.

Its almost like they are trying to find some way to make it seem worse than it is.

Edit to post.

In fact its almost like they are trying to ignore the fact that the eight core Ryzen is significantly cheaper than an eight core Intel CPU,and are trying to switch the narrative to the Core i7 7700K.
I wonder why??

 

[Glo.]

What's annoying is that some of these reviewers have an inability to actually understand the basics of the hardware they are given by companies and it is somewhat concerning.

I really hope some of the supposed pressure Intel is putting on reviewers is not manifested in "misunderstandings" of some basics.

The CPUs in the X99 platform have a separate southbridge which handles USB,SATA,etc. Ryzen is a SOC which has the southbridge as part of the CPU itself.

So no wonder it might dissipate a bit more heat - there is simply more under the hood when compared to the equivalent X99 CPUs.

I will judge Ryzen reviews, and the chips, themselves when I will actually see them. Not before.