I really don't like when reviews regurgitate old results like that. Software and firmware updates so far have already yielded significant increases since a month ago.
Laziness begets #FAKENEWS!
As long as we don't have confirmation both R5 and R7 were using same board & same BIOS, it's not strange at all.
In fact, judging by their previous 1700X review (image on the right) the results in their current review are identical to those collected 1 month ago.
As long as we don't have confirmation both R5 and R7 were using same board & same BIOS, it's not strange at all.
In fact, judging by their previous 1700X review (image on the right) the results in their current review are identical to those collected 1 month ago.
So why would the 6700k lose performance in DOOM using vulkan?
And comparing this with the information of R5 1400 benchmark (http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming...-first-gaming-video-comparison-intel-core-i5/) it seems that R5 is pretty much living up the expectations. Having 1400 performance with only 169$ brings nearly blissful tear to your eye.Ryzen 5 1600 review (in Spanish) https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2017/04/amd-ryzen-5-1600-review/
?
143.61 vs.... 143.61
Am I looking in the wrong place?
Can you guys make a short summary? What are the conclusion of these videos?
Reviewers are getting crappier by the minute. I don't have time to watch hours of review videos. They should just post text & graphs. Lazy....
It's weird since the actual run time is 21 seconds in R15. In other video reviews on YT the same test takes around 25-26s on 4Ghz Ryzen 8C, so it seems it is not the sleep bug. He also states he rebooted and redone the tests with the same results. Strange results to say the least.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc3qjnnX1PA
update to 1703 (creators update) gives 20% improvment
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/63itas/20_more_performance_on_1703_or_just_a_bug/
You are correct. Though I think a 7700 as control is important. Everything I have seen is really starting to imply that Nvidia drivers are capped to the 7700k configuration in DX12 and anything more is hurt because the extra cores don't help and they are generally clocked lower and with lower IPC than the 7700. This and the driver/cpu overhead are really driving down high core PCU benches with a DX12 on Nvidia cards.I just can't understand why they are all benchmarking Ryzen against I7-7700k when they should benchmark it against I7-6900k. That's the only valid comparision if you really want to see how driver stack works in multithreaded surrounding when you actually have room for all those threads.
Looking to build a 1700 based system and want to overclock, but I have some questions. I'm hoping to be able to run all cores at around 3.8 GHz, and I don't need features like RGB LEDs, WiFi or SLI support. Will I be missing out on performance or reliability by going with a B350 based board? If not, any recommendations on what board to get?
Lastly, as I understand it Ryzen prefers higher RAM speeds. The sticks I would want to purchase support 3200 MHz speed at CL15, but as far as I can tell, most (at least the ones I have looked at QVL's for) AM4 boards will currently only run them at 2133 MHz. These are from Corsair. Is this likely to be patched eventually? Compatible RAM that will run at 3200 MHz CL14 (like the G.skill Flare) is almost twice as expensive in my region, so I'm not sure if I should spring for it, or hope for better support eventually. Some suggestions would be appreciated.
I just can't understand why they are all benchmarking Ryzen against I7-7700k when they should benchmark it against I7-6900k. That's the only valid comparision if you really want to see how driver stack works in multithreaded surrounding when you actually have room for all those threads.
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.
Because of the price. No one outside of content creators or the very affluent should ever consider the 6900k.I just can't understand why they are all benchmarking Ryzen against I7-7700k when they should benchmark it against I7-6900k. That's the only valid comparision if you really want to see how driver stack works in multithreaded surrounding when you actually have room for all those threads.
Looking to build a 1700 based system and want to overclock, but I have some questions. I'm hoping to be able to run all cores at around 3.8 GHz, and I don't need features like RGB LEDs, WiFi or SLI support. Will I be missing out on performance or reliability by going with a B350 based board? If not, any recommendations on what board to get?
Lastly, as I understand it Ryzen prefers higher RAM speeds. The sticks I would want to purchase support 3200 MHz speed at CL15, but as far as I can tell, most (at least the ones I have looked at QVL's for) AM4 boards will currently only run them at 2133 MHz. These are from Corsair. Is this likely to be patched eventually? Compatible RAM that will run at 3200 MHz CL14 (like the G.skill Flare) is almost twice as expensive in my region, so I'm not sure if I should spring for it, or hope for better support eventually. Some suggestions would be appreciated.
lots of problems were solved with 1.32 beta bios (long POST,3200memory)it also probably had new Agesa too since i saw lower memory latency with higher timmings than before.,but it seems the beta bioses where taken down from forums supposedly to be reposted the following days this week.What bios? I'm on 1.2 and can't get above 2600
lots of problems were solved with 1.32 beta bios (long POST,3200memory)it also probably had new Agesa too since i saw lower memory latency.,but it seems the beta bioses where taken down from forums supposedly to be reposted the following days this week.
Because of the price. No one outside of content creators or the very affluent should ever consider the 6900k.