Ryzen-A Fail for Gamers?

[USER8000]

Some of you need to step back a little first??

Ryzen isn't an Athlon 64 moment where Intel was beaten in every game and almost every non-gaming benchmark.

The AMD and Intel CPUs are different designs,so will have different strengths and weaknesses.

There are games which Ryzen does worse in price/performance,than Intel,and games AMD will do better than in Intel in price/performance.

Trying to twist it either way is stupid,since for every person playing Battlefield 1 which loves cores,there is another person playing World of Tanks,etc which barely uses more than a few cores.

If someone plays Battlefield 1 they will love Ryzen 7,and if you play World of Tanks you will love the Core i3 7350K.

 

[AMDisTheBEST]

Witcher3 on ryzen in novigrad i see there some cpu limits.7700k have around 120fps in that square.Zen barely hold 60fps.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-iEpSRey1s&feature=youtu.be&t=121

There is a good explanation for this. You see.... Ryzen was in "Bulldozer mode". Turn it off, 1000+ fps guaranteed.

 

[LTC8K6]

Some of you need to step back a little first??

Ryzen isn't an Athlon 64 moment where Intel was beaten in every game and almost every non-gaming benchmark.

The AMD and Intel CPUs are different designs,so will have different strengths and weaknesses.

There are games which Ryzen does worse in price/performance,than Intel,and games AMD will do better than in Intel in price/performance.

Trying to twist it either way is stupid,since for every person playing Battlefield 1 which loves cores,there is another person playing World of Tanks,etc which barely uses more than a few cores.

If someone plays Battlefield 1 they will love Ryzen 7,and if you play World of Tanks you will love the Core i3 7350K.

No one will love the 7350K...

and I'm an Intel fan.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Does posting a load of unsubstantiated numbers count as spam?

Maybe but if you put that load into a diaper I know what it counts as.

 

[moonbogg]

Just read somewhere how CPU/GPU bottleneck works then come back.If he is already on CPU bottleneck with 1070 then faster GPU wont help.Only OC cpu will help.
7700k without GPU bottleneck is able push 120-130fps in that part.
https://youtu.be/tbGT-u4i3EY?t=720
Why is here so many people whos dont know anything how CPU/GPU bottleneck works?

I wish I could ignore your point, but I can't. If the chip is at it's limit with a 1070 showing 60fps while the intel system is faster with the same card, then that means the Ryzen is already maxed out. A faster GPU would be a Titanic waste of money.
I am trying so hard to ignore this whole thing. Trying to convince myself that its no big deal. I'm trying to hold on to that excitement that I felt about Ryzen and rationalize a way to keep that feeling alive. It's not working.

 

[raghu78]

well said LTC8K6. I think R5 1500x with 4C/8T could become a huge hit if its priced at USD 179.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Someone made a great post on reddit talking about the discrepancies with the benchmarks. I could barely believe the level of bias and/or incompetence!

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5xx0o7/gamersnexus_game_selection_is_important_but_how/

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Just watched Steve @ GN's latest 1700 review. I don't have a problem with his data (it's not fake!).

But be careful how you interpret it. Let me explain with evidence in case some here accuse me of misinformation.

If you look at how Steve @ GN test it's very different. How does Steve @ GN test Watch Dogs 2? Watch for yourself, do it please.

https://youtu.be/IDN7dFTNjkg?t=3m42shttps://www.computerbase.de/2017-03/amd-ryzen-1800x-1700x-1700-test/4/#diagramm-watch-dogs-2-fps

See that i5 crumble?

People discredit Joker's result, but he tests the same, driving around in a car. See that i7 pegged to the max and dropping FPS?

https://youtu.be/BXVIPo_qbc4?t=6m45sSee how the more core/thread Intel parts leave the weaker quad cores in the dust?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRVzZL5RvFkhttps://www.computerbase.de/2017-03.../#diagramm-battlefield-1-dx11-multiplayer-fps

But the important point here, not just in game selection, but actually how you test these games will greatly alter the results.

We've seen what happens when you test with more games and under different (which one you believe to be more representative, that's your opinion) conditions, Ryzen is much more competitive.

https://www.computerbase.de/2017-03.../#abschnitt_benchmarks_mit_fps_und_frametimes

Anyone who says Ryzen 7 is only an i5 in gaming, well, AdoredTV summed it up well: "a crock of shit!".

 

[Head1985]

I wish I could ignore your point, but I can't. If the chip is at it's limit with a 1070 showing 60fps while the intel system is faster with the same card, then that means the Ryzen is already maxed out.

Wrong.
If GTX1070 with ryzen have 80-90% GPU load=its CPU bottleneck.Even if you buy 10x faster card FPS will be same in that scene where GPU load is 80%.In this case around 60fps.
If GTX1070 runs at 99% whole time=Its GPU bottleneck.You can buy faster card and you will have more fps like we have seen with GP102 where 7700k have in that scene 120-130fps.

I hope you will now understand how CPU/GPU bottleneck works.This is also why test in 1080p with TITANXP=it will show how cpu will work with faster card in furure.Because TITANXP will be mainstream 2years from now and with ryzen you will have same fps in that scene with GTX1070 and with much faster card like GTX2080 or whatever.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Wrong.
If GTX1070 with ryzen have 80-90% GPU load=its CPU bottleneck.Even if you buy 10x faster card FPS will be same in that scene where GPU load is 80%.In this case around 60fps.
If GTX1070 runs at 99% whole time=Its GPU bottleneck.You can buy faster card and you will have more fps like we have seen with GP102 where 7700k have in that scene 120-130fps.

I hope you will now understand how CPU/GPU bottleneck works.This is also why test in 1080p with TITANXP=it will show how cpu will work with faster card in furure.Because TITANXP will be mainstream 2years from now and with ryzen you will have same fps in that scene with GTX1070 and with much faster card like GTX2080 or whatever.

REAL benchmark for tw3

https://www.computerbase.de/2017-03/amd-ryzen-1800x-1700x-1700-test/4/#diagramm-the-witcher-3-fps

2-4% from 7700k

1% from 6900k

 

[Pseudoics]

It's as if every mainstream 1080p gamer in the world has suddenly turned off V-sync for this Ryzen launch. How many "reviewers" are using a GPU testing methodology of increasing (or decreasing) resolution and neglecting to mention refreshrates that are of concern for actual displays people use. Like what does 300fps vs 500fps in TombRaider indicate, really?!? It's so far beyond the limit of displays that any so called 'future CPU bottlenecking' will be as well. Why not mention that 1080p60, 4K60 are exactly the same in terms of CPU bottleneck. A faster GPU will just run closer to idle with Vysnc or a frame cap. It's 144hz+ (resolution regardless) non-adaptive sync owners who should pay a little more attention. But running games at 1080pTearing and calling it a fail is ridiculous.

There's teething issues for sure, and optimisations to come (who remembers all the game patches with improved hyperthread balancing?). But it's the reviewers who have really failed here.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

[Kallogan]

Amazing cpu, will only get better with time for obvious reasons.

computerbase.de is such a good website, testing with undervolting and hyperthreading disabled, the two best ways to stay within TDP and run turbo clocks forever when gaming (laptop gamer here )

 

[Crono]

The 1400X is what I'm expecting will be the best value for gaming, if it's priced at $199. 3.5GHz base, 3.9GHz turbo, 4 cores, 8 threads, 65W TDP. If it overclocks even moderately well, it's lined up to compete very favorably against the i5-7600K.

The ~$200 price point has a lot of appeal.

 

[beginner99]

The R5 1400X is what I'm expecting will be the best value for gaming, if it's priced at $199. 3.5GHz base, 3.9GHz turbo, 4 cores, 8 threads, 65W TDP. If it overclocks even moderately well, it's lined up to compete very favorably against the i5-7600K.

The ~$200 price point has a lot of appeal.

I disagree. For $120 more you can get double the cores (1700) and most of them can hit 3.8 Ghz all core speed. The limitation in OC is the process so less cores won't really help much. maybe 100 mhz more. It's a brick wall.

 

[Erenhardt]

Fast 4/8 is better for gaming than slow 8/16 most of the time.
6/12 may be the way to go thanks to more cache.

 

[tamz_msc]

120fps with faster GPU omg.I am 100% time GPu bottleneck with GTX1070 he is not he have cpu bottleneck.
you didnt watch digital foundry videos?
https://youtu.be/tbGT-u4i3EY?t=714

ryzen have 85% GPU usage in that market with 60-65fps=He is cpu bottleneck.
Watch his GPU usage
https://youtu.be/O-iEpSRey1s?t=129

Here is mine video 99% GPU usage
https://youtu.be/5bNpBTS24NI?t=20

Anyway lets wait for digital foundy review.You will see.

You cannot call a game hitting a CPU-bottleneck when it hardly utilizes the CPU. In that video you posted I saw two threads at 80-90% and two at 50%, on average while the other threads are not being utilized much at all.

Witcher 3 favors single-threaded performance first and foremost - and the 1.2 GHz couple with the high IPC would of course favor the 7700K. Not to mention that memory plays a huge part as well, especially in the Novigrad region. You can even negate the effect of CPU overclock if you have fast enough RAM. We have no idea about what frequency the memory was running at in that video.

Anybody can compare random youtube clips to prove a certain point, that does not mean that the comparison is meaningful.

 

[Rngwn]

The 1400X is what I'm expecting will be the best value for gaming, if it's priced at $199. 3.5GHz base, 3.9GHz turbo, 4 cores, 8 threads, 65W TDP. If it overclocks even moderately well, it's lined up to compete very favorably against the i5-7600K.

The ~$200 price point has a lot of appeal.

The 1400x is going to be the $200 Haswell i7-k on a newer platform w/o integrated graphics. Whether that is a worthwhile investment is anyone's decision.

 

[yepp]

120fps with faster GPU omg.I am 100% time GPu bottleneck with GTX1070 he is not he have cpu bottleneck.
you didnt watch digital foundry videos?
https://youtu.be/tbGT-u4i3EY?t=714

ryzen have 85% GPU usage in that market with 60-65fps=He is cpu bottleneck.
Watch his GPU usage
https://youtu.be/O-iEpSRey1s?t=129

Here is mine video 99% GPU usage
https://youtu.be/5bNpBTS24NI?t=20

Anyway lets wait for digital foundy review.You will see.

DigitalFoundry is running with hairworks off, the ryzen has hairworks on, see settings at beginning of vid. So thats a terrible disadvantage for a 1070 against the Titan XP.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-review

 

[inf64]

I hope you will now understand how CPU/GPU bottleneck works.This is also why test in 1080p with TITANXP=it will show how cpu will work with faster card in furure.Because TITANXP will be mainstream 2years from now and with ryzen you will have same fps in that scene with GTX1070 and with much faster card like GTX2080 or whatever.

Wait , are you saying that Ryzen will fail to achieve higher fps in 2 years time when coupled with more powerful(nextgen) GPU ?
If that is what you are saying, you have to look back and see how that worked out for 2500K Vs 8350. Not too good for 2500K .
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...and-discussion.2499879/page-149#post-38778453
Ryzen will have no issues with new, more powerful GPUs. The 4C/8T chip like 7700K on the other hand. It might end up like that 2500K if we are to judge from the past experiences.

 

[Glo.]

Wrong.
If GTX1070 with ryzen have 80-90% GPU load=its CPU bottleneck.Even if you buy 10x faster card FPS will be same in that scene where GPU load is 80%.In this case around 60fps.
If GTX1070 runs at 99% whole time=Its GPU bottleneck.You can buy faster card and you will have more fps like we have seen with GP102 where 7700k have in that scene 120-130fps.

I hope you will now understand how CPU/GPU bottleneck works.This is also why test in 1080p with TITANXP=it will show how cpu will work with faster card in furure.Because TITANXP will be mainstream 2years from now and with ryzen you will have same fps in that scene with GTX1070 and with much faster card like GTX2080 or whatever.

What if your GPU runs lower than 99% all the time, and the CPU runs less than 99% all the time? Which bottleneck is it?

Maybe you missed it, but this is the bloody case with Ryzen 7 CPUs in games.

 

[french toast]

What if your GPU runs lower than 99% all the time, and the CPU runs less than 99% all the time? Which bottleneck is it?

Maybe you missed it, but this is the bloody case with Ryzen 7 CPUs in games.

I have noticed the Ryzen benchmarks are not pushing it's limits at all, in fact it's not even touching the sides.
I don't know whether it's a game driver issue or what, very strange if you ask me.

 

[AtenRa]

I wish I could ignore your point, but I can't. If the chip is at it's limit with a 1070 showing 60fps while the intel system is faster with the same card, then that means the Ryzen is already maxed out. A faster GPU would be a Titanic waste of money.

No it will not, it will produce higher fps

Example in heavily CPU bound game,
According to what you say, the A8-7600 APU + GTX 770 is completely CPU limited and thus upgrading to a faster GPU will be a titanic waste of money,

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9307/the-kaveri-refresh-godavari-review-testing-amds-a10-7870k

Well, from 40fps with the GTX 770 the A8-7600 managed to increase its fps to 46fps with the GTX 980.

Another one,

From 20fps to 23fps when according to people the faster GPU would not increase fps because you were CPU limited with a slower card.

 

[PotatoWithEarsOnSide]

R7 1700 vs 7700k will make for a good ongoing battle. Would love to track the progress of the two over the course of their lifespan. Somehow, I don't think it'll take as long for the R7 1700 to show dominance as it did for the FX8350 over the 2500k.
Its a long game versus short game scenario. The one thing that should sway the most is the longevity of the AM4 platform. In 3-4 years time there'll likely be a better offering still using AM4. For those so inclined, that's potentially 7-8 years of CPUs out of one MOBO.

 

[otinane]

I don't know if this has been on your attention lately, but at least for me tells a lot about what gaming benchmarks mean for CPU:

Here are some more details:

 

[inf64]

Yes, we are discussing that video for the last few pages...

 

[psolord]

Wait , are you saying that Ryzen will fail to achieve higher fps in 2 years time when coupled with more powerful(nextgen) GPU ?
If that is what you are saying, you have to look back and see how that worked out for 2500K Vs 8350. Not too good for 2500K .
Ryzen will have no issues with new, more powerful GPUs. The 4C/8T chip like 7700K on the other hand. It might end up like that 2500K if we are to judge from the past experiences.

Is that the test where they used the 2500k with 1333Mhz memory? Because if it is, people should really stop throwing it around.