Your Take on Ryzen? Worth buying or stick to Intel

[JimKiler]

I am curious, will anyone abandon AMD or are you dissapointed or is it good enough or more future leaning to buy? How does everyone feel now that reviews are out.

If you need review they are aggregated at wccftech:

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-review-roundup-official-launch-coverage/

 

[StinkyPinky]

It's exactly what was promised wasn't it? Strongly improved IPC with strong multi-core performance. Gaming is also strong at 1440p and above. Let's face it, if you are gaming on a 8 core cpu you probably aren't on a 1080p panel anyway

 

[LTC8K6]

My impression is that it's a great step for AMD, but not nearly the threat to Intel that I was expecting.
I wouldn't move from Intel HEDT or 7700K to RyZen.
I would buy RyZen if starting out fresh and moving from something a few years old. The 1700 though, not either X model. The X models don't seem worth paying for over the 1700.

 

[IntelUser2000]

It's exactly what was promised wasn't it? Strongly improved IPC with strong multi-core performance. Gaming is also strong at 1440p and above. Let's face it, if you are gaming on a 8 core cpu you probably aren't on a 1080p panel anyway

Intel HEDT platform wasn't perceived well for gamers either.

The enthusiast consumers are the most demanding bunch. I am not saying its a bad thing, but its one space where few single digit percentages count.

 

[UsandThem]

I'm gonna wait until all the various updates/fine tuning is done over the next few weeks before making a final conclusion.

This is why I never get involved in the back-and-forth debates based on hype before a product is released, and thoroughly tested by reputable sites. I would have never pre-ordered it like some here did. Not that they were wrong for doing so, I'm just not an early adopter anymore.

As of right now, I look at it being a competitive product, but a little over-hyped in the gaming area (which can still improve with updates). It's overall performance is good enough to get Intel's attention without a doubt.

 

[JimKiler]

It's exactly what was promised wasn't it? Strongly improved IPC with strong multi-core performance. Gaming is also strong at 1440p and above. Let's face it, if you are gaming on a 8 core cpu you probably aren't on a 1080p panel anyway

That is a good point. I play games 2-3 years old usually because i prefer the $10 prices but i usually still do 1080p so far. I do want to jump to 1440p when i upgrade my GPU this summer or fall.

 

[arandomguy]

I wouldn't discount the differences at 1080p, it all depends on what games you test and where you test.

Numbers on this site for example show very real differences among CPUs even at 1080p -
https://www.purepc.pl/procesory/premiera_i_test_procesora_amd_ryzen_r7_1800x_dobra_zmiana?page=0,15

I'll go on my CPU game review rant again but I really think CPU gaming tests are not well done at this stage compared to GPU ones. One likely issue is possibly reviewers treat GPUs and CPUs the same, but you should not be testing the same location in a game as a GPU review with a CPU review.

 

[philosofool]

Obviously, scenarios differ.

To whom would I recommend Ryzen? A person currently using an older processor who needs a performance upgrade, has a budget, and needs multicore computing. Those in the gaming segment should probably wait until the 6c/12t and 4c/8t parts are released.

Performance/price seems great but this is not a processor that merits an upgrade if you are already using a computer less than two years old, unless you have very high multicore performance demands.

AMD has changed things for the end consumer, but they haven't changed desktop computing.

 

[Tup3x]

For now I'll stick with my 3770K @ 4,4 GHz. It's going to be interesting to see how well Zen+ does.

 

[Burpo]

R5 1600X when it comes out.. Till then X58 turned up will suffice.. Will be nice to lower power envelope..

 

[plopke]

If you a pure gamer ->7700K/Intel. But I just can not vote yes/no , ryzen R7 is hard for me to place in a overall picture, the one thing it does well is make the 6800 and up just look chilly priced.

But like Usanthem stated I am going to wait for the fine tuning as well.
So waiting on those BIOS updates, If I read this correctly AMD will have their cpu drivers up to date in about a month to fix windows 10 issues. I was kinda excited to read the reviews today to then realize come back in a month time when we have the final bios/drivers. Not that it will result in massive gains , just me less having to thinker with everything in windows 10 and BIOS settings.

 

[Ferzerp]

Less bad than their last. Not a pure stinker, but it still shows that going wide only works some of the time. Single threaded performance with enough cores will still be king, especially in the gaming space, for quite some time. The strategy of just going wide and hoping some day software will follow is less a strategy and more a hope. I say that because wide is "easy" and "cheap" to implement.

I suspected it would be another impressively wide, but lacklusterly shallow offering when all the leaks were always extremely parallel tasks.

It may get them some desktop market share back. It won't do anything in the datacenter though where the CPU cost is such a small fraction of the TCO that the price argument always falls flat (and where Intel is already impressively wide).

 

[William Gaatjes]

I still have to read the review.
I just got home.
If i would be interested in a 1700, it would cost me 379 euros if i would buy at www.alternate.nl .
The 1800x costs 589 euros.

 

[AMDisTheBEST]

I am staying faithful to my now 4 years old piledriver. XD it doesn't bottleneck my r9 380 so no reason for Ryzen yet.

 

[Absolute0]

What a morning of reading! Anyone else in the office *not really working*?

List of reviews for those catching up:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3176191/computers/ryzen-review-amd-is-back.html
http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2822-amd-ryzen-r7-1800x-review-premiere-blender-fps-benchmarks
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X-Review-Now-and-Zen
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_7_1800x_processor_review,1.html
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/03/02/amd_ryzen_1700x_cpu_review/1
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/1345-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x/
http://www.pcgamer.com/the-amd-ryzen-7-review/

I think the community got TOO caught up in hyped up synthetics, and the community was also expecting Ryzen to clock to 4.5 Ghz or so. It's very disappointing to see ~ 4Ghz is the limit.

RE: the hype, I think a lot of this hype game from rumor-mill sites I've seen links too, where the purpose of the Ryzen hype is to pump up the AMD stock. There are a lot of players in the game with big $ in $AMD (even I have shares), but it's just too easy to see how or why this got pumped and hyped up sooo much. Based on Synthetics, nonsense like Canard PC's "5 Ghz Ryzen easter egg," the dozen articles touting the LN2 WR OC, etc. Too much pump.

"4GHz looks to be the ceiling"
"Ryzen simply has a huge clock deficit to overcome compared to Intel"
- Kyle Bennett
"All three Ryzen 7 samples I tested failing to get beyond 4.0GHz."
-Jarred Walton, PC Gamer

Left and right we looked at the results and thought "wow once clocked to 4.2+ Ghz these things will fly!" and that's not happening. Cuz AMD clocked them to the limit.

**Guru of 3d manages 4.1 on 1800X/water.

The results are obvious: Ryzen for rendering, encoding, content creation... People who need 8C and use heavily threaded software. Ryzen IS big, big for AMD. It is a paradigm shift and a blow to Intel. I think Ryzen has a lot of potential in the server space. The edge in efficiency and power consumption is something that isn't garnering much discussion from what I've seen.

EDIT: maybe I spoke too soon "In fact, despite the 95 watt TDP, the Ryzen CPU uses about the same power as the 140 watt Broadwell-E processors"
95W TDP looking very questionable:
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Proce...Now-and-Zen/Power-Consumption-and-Conclusions

Gaming reiterates my personal perspective that a decent i5 CPU + a top end GPU is fine. Ryzen contributes little here, except as an upgrade pathway with some longevity given the core count. As has been mentioned countless times in reviews tho: for most games, clockspeed is king.

"Even after down-clocking the -7700K to 3.8 GHz, it still beats Ryzen 7 1800X in nearly every game in our suite." - THG

In an earlier discussion, I stated that for GAMERS with a decent i5 or better CPU, a $500 GPU is a far, far better upgrade than $500 spent on Ryzen CPU & platform, because right now 8C16T is not delivering frames that merit dropping $$$ which could be better spent on a GTX1080.

Was going to add that I don't exactly understand Kyle being so nice about Ryzen's VR performance after showing that it was equaled by a 2600K from 2011 (lol). BTW Anandtech needs to get their gaming benches together plz.

Get a r1700 and OC to 4ghz, perf/$ wont be beaten in games or productivity, unless looking at that new pentium.

Probably beaten in games by i5 (either 7600K or second-hand dirt cheap i5) clocked 4.5+


In closing: his 3570 is OC 4.2 Ghz, but this sums up the disappointment with gaming performance:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3176...-or-why-you-should-never-preorder.html?page=2

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

IPC is odd and all over the damned place (cratering down to ~Sandybridge, exceeding Haswell/Broadwell)

Still, solid choice for ~$500 (R7-1700 @ ~4GHz + mid-high end mobo), considering that AMD has achieved platform parity with Intel
(eg. SATA and PCI-E performance vs. Intel native).

Also, an R7 @ 4GHz will come close to matching / slightly beat my dual X5690 Z800 at video encodes, which is nice.

I think the community got TOO caught up in hyped up synthetics, and the community was also expecting Ryzen to clock to 4.5 Ghz or so. It's very disappointing to see ~ 4Ghz is the limit.

That is somewhat good and bad. Bad is obvious, good is that you might as well just pickup a 1700 non-X.
Almost like a Pentium II 333 vs. 400 back in the day (the PII-400 wouldn't OC for sh*t).

 

[William Gaatjes]

I do wonder how much of those reviews use optimized software. Because i put a question mark at the question of how often do we have access to fully optimized software for a given architecture.
If reviewers use software that is highly optimized for intels latest 256bit avx but in practice that software may be very expensive and may not be easily to come by.
I am all for using the latest and greatest tricks a cpu has to offer, but there is also software that is used daily that might not have all that optimizations, corresponding to more real world use.

 

[french toast]

Get a r1700 and OC to 4ghz, perf/$ wont be beaten in games or productivity, unless looking at that new pentium.

 

[.vodka]

Ryzen should be re-reviewed once BIOSes are finished and bug fixed. Reviews encountering issues here and there, new BIOSes every day... yeah. It's chaotic.

As it is, for what it costs, in it's current work in progress state, it's amazing value. I'll wait it out until mid year for the platform to be stable enough and bug fixed enough, then I'll upgrade.

R7 1700 or R5 1600x for me. Zen 2 or 3 down the road with most of the low hanging fruit picked in the design... AM4 should be a great platform to be onto for the upcoming years.

 

[RichUK]

For the typical user, the 7700k still appears to be the better option. Not sure if the Kaby Lake price drops have happened yet.

 

[LTC8K6]

For the typical user, the 7700k still appears to be the better option. Not sure if the Kaby Lake price drops have happened yet.

They don't need to happen yet, apparently.

 

[french toast]

For the typical user, the 7700k still appears to be the better option. Not sure if the Kaby Lake price drops have happened yet.

Better than the R1700 ?? In what scenario?

 

[Genx87]

I would buy it if I was still encoding BluRay. But all I do is game and watch Youtube on my computer. So the i7 7700K is still better for me.

 

[Justinbaileyman]

I say yes go buy a Ryzen CPU, it is exactly what AMD promised and then some.Besides by keep supporting the competition it will cause the long put on hold push forward in computer technology.
We should have been at this point 5 years ago!!

 

[RichUK]

Plus, overclocking the 7700k to c. 5ghz extends the performance margin for typical usage.

I am happy with my 7700k @ 5.1ghz / DDR4-4000 C16 setup.