Then you have landed in The Twilight Zone. In every Ryzen review Kyle and Co. have done, they always shoot for the best stable OC possible.
Kyle said:
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Broadwell-E vs Ryzen in games (PurePC)
- Thread starter -Sweeper_
- Start date
Then you have landed in The Twilight Zone. In every Ryzen review Kyle and Co. have done, they always shoot for the best stable OC possible.
OrangeKhrush
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,673
It is the node, there was a great write up on Samsung's 14nm LPP being unrivaled at low frequency on perf and power usage but as soon as it got to 3ghz it would spiral out exponentially. AMD have also changed nodes from one release to the other before, Zambezi was out on SOI while Vishera was trigate planar.
If you are on any X99 or Z100-200 there is no point in upgrading or considering AMD for an upgrade, but people like myself on Haswell or older there is platform benefits to changing to AMD or better put considering AMD's platform, and that AMD is about the same level as my 4790 in gaming metrics. I would love a M.2 option for my ITX and to get an equatable upgrade on Intel the 6700 is way overpriced, not helped by a relegation to junk status the import taxes will sky rocket.
The sensationalism is not really needed, I can read graphs, the common rhetoric is normally focused on The rise of the tomb raider, one of the most broken games in the history of mankind and yet nothing is posted on Dota 2 online, Overwatch online, Battlefield online, CS:GO online the 4 most played games globally, instead we have to get a bunch old games before Ryzen was even a twinkle in the eye.
I have stated what I need to, if I wanted the best setup then I am not a fanboy that has to worried about what brand I have, I have used AMD +Nvida, AMD + AMD, Intel + AMD when they were unbeatable combos, I am also not a FPS whore that sits with fraps or rivatuner on just to pump up ego, I get an ego from 100 kills per round, that was mostly done on a old 2400, H61 and GTX670 combo until I went up to Haswell. I got a GTX980ti recently for cheap but I was very happy with the performance of the RX470 for what I needed it to do.
Master_shake_
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 17,794
i guess the real question is, is the 6900k being twice the price of a 1800x make it twice the cpu?
OrangeKhrush
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,673
The lead article wants people to believe that intel is 40-60% ahead based on the most cherry picked limited games. I can't believe I am saying this but Juanrga's post is the most agreeable one here, 15% is about where it really is at. The world is going to end having actually had to agree with something he posted.
I see, Hardocp is THE world.
OrangeKhrush
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,673
It depends on whatever point of view you are trying to push. This is just one site with one point of view that should always be considered in the vast spectrum of reviews.
It's a site dedicated to enthusiasts who are more likely to overclock their rig. I imagine there is a site out there someplace where all the stock clock guys congregate to compare one set of stock clocks to the next, but I'd never spend any time there.
I bet if Ryzen was a monster overclocker, then overclocking would suddenly become a lot bigger deal
OrangeKhrush
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,673
6700K/4.0-4.2Ghz/DDR4 3600
1600/stock/DDR4 2400
The usual suspects show a gap but in the others its a wash, a 220 dollar vs 340 dollar part with an advantage.
Can you send link me to the write up?
Cause leakage is a constitution of both node and architecture, but if leakage is too high that node will not be used, hence why 20nm failed.
Why not just wait till Skylake E comes out? (Granted you can expect the price to be more but you might not need to get the 8 core variant to keep up with Ryzen, so Intel might be able to price those competitive to Ryzen) its 6 months out, and will demolish Ryzen in everything gaming to workstation loads. That is the problem, Zen gives nothing over what is already out there, when Ivy Bridge came out, there was no questions if it was worth it or not, it was worth it. Zen has questions, some times its useful sometimes it not. Ivy Bridge never had those questions, it was what it was, just better than what was out there. Can't say that about Ryzen, that's why its a so so product, its not giving anything that says, well I need to upgrade now cause its worth it.
Last edited:
OrangeKhrush
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,673
I need to search for it, it was posted to Anandtech by dresdenboy.
I am considering not buying. There are caveats aswell. I only do ITX and intel x doesn't do that. Also X is overrated, stock 5960, 6900,6950, 6800, 58Xx/59Xx often languish behind ryzen in stock performance. They are glorified workstations that cost more, i will rather get a 7700.
The big issue is economics, right now im pat on the issue
lolfail9001
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 31, 2016
- Messages
- 1,496
Wait, wait, wait, weren't you complaining about usage of stock memory?
OrangeKhrush
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,673
Oh dear
Expected deflection.It's a site dedicated to enthusiasts who are more likely to overclock their rig. I imagine there is a site out there someplace where all the stock clock guys congregate to compare one set of stock clocks to the next, but I'd never spend any time there.
I bet if Ryzen was a monster overclocker, then overclocking would suddenly become a lot bigger deal
Low res high FPS gaming and workstations are different market segments.
Btw Ryzen's current official supported RAM speeds for two sticks are 2400 and 2667.
Last edited:
Low res high FPS gaming and workstations are different market segments.
Btw Ryzen's current official supported RAM speeds for two sticks are 2400 and 2667.
LOL funny pic.
Stock speed ram is what Intel officially supports too.
You are right workstations don't need high speed ram, but they sure the hell need more than 16 gb of RAM even 32 is low, 64 is minimum and that too better to get more, the more memory a workstation has the better it funcitons, and Intel chips have quad channel which helps them even more.
AdoredTV and Joker Productions are the new Zen gurus. I demonstrated to AdoredTV that his numbers are wrong... he forgot all what I said him, including the links to reviews that contradict what he says, and he is asking me why his numbers are contradictory, LOL
http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showpost.php?p=287034&postcount=8476
14HP? Will not happen.
OrangeKhrush
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,673
If
If they are repeatable then the contridiction needs to be investigated for the anamoly.
1) age of initial review
2) firmware updates
3) drivers
4) patches
5) game updates
6) windows updates
You have a very dogmatic approach to AMD, i will be very interested to see your objections if it was the other way around.
If they are repeatable then the contridiction needs to be investigated for the anamoly.
1) age of initial review
2) firmware updates
3) drivers
4) patches
5) game updates
6) windows updates
You have a very dogmatic approach to AMD, i will be very interested to see your objections if it was the other way around.
DuronBurgerMan
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,341
We've yet to see what Naples will deliver on the higher end. AMD wants to position the Ryzen 1800X as a direct competitor to the 6900k, but it's not quite right, because while multithreaded performance is generally very similar, the Ryzen platform doesn't have the full feature set, like memory support over 64GB, etc... Neither is the 8 core Ryzen really a direct competitor for the 7700k, per se (it either stomps the 7700k, or gets stomped by the 7700k, depending on the task). It really exists in a gap between the Intel volume seller and HEDT part, allowing for budget workstation builds, prosumer builds, and mixed-use builds. Its most realistic competitor is probably the 6800k and 6850k, given price and feature set. 6800 and 6850 have higher RAM support, but Ryzen has more cores and broadly similar IPC. Closer competition.
So if you're a pure gamer, 7700k is the best. If you're a studio on an unlimited budget, 6900k, 6950k, or high end Xeons are best. But if you want to buy a reasonably-priced workstation, or a multi-use/heavy multitasking system, a Ryzen 7 flavor is your CPU. Half of this game isn't even raw performance, it's market positioning.
Rumor mill has it that a 16c/32t Zen part will be available with higher memory support than Ryzen, and will be targeted toward workstation. And we already know Naples will be hitting the server market, where Zen's low power process may actually be a great advantage. But while these might be cheaper than comparable Intel products, they won't be cheap. Expect a rather large price gap between the 1800X and whatever the lower end of those parts will cost.
DuronBurgerMan
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,341
On the flip side of that, I carefully combed the QVL for my motherboard, and selected 2 double-sided sticks (so I could get 32GB out of two DIMMs) that were listed as doing 2666. They actually did 2933. For SS 16GB two DIMM configurations, there were plenty of options north of that.
People really need to read the motherboard memory lists. Dunno why so many people freelance that sh*t.
We have yet to see what Skylake X with 32 cores will too, Purely looks to be well ahead of what AMD will have in their chip sets features wise at this point. There is always something better down the road too, but Skylake X there is no doubt it will be able to do everything better than Ryzen, no not good at some things, Skylake X can clock higher than Broadwell E. We saw the differences with Skylake vs Broadwell those same things should, actually will happen with Skylake X. It has higher IPC than Broadwell too.
ANY semi pro or pro studio will get Intel, budgets, lets see even small studios only have like 5 graphics artists a jr graphics artist for WEB SITE DESIGN gets paid 50k-75k a year depending on locality right out of college. Half a years salary of one Jr. graphics artist will cover the 5 systems. That is a worth while investment for those companies, on top of that they get discounts if those "small studios' have parent studios, which most of them do, that are larger firms. You should see WPP, Y&R, Medicus, H4B, those are HUGE global firms but are comprised of many smaller firms all across the world.
Now Ryzen is only useful for home workstation buyers who want something on the cheap. A person making 50-75K in graphic arts a year better spend the 5k for 3 years to get a top end system don't you think? And if this person is right out of college, well yeah no family to worry about (probably) Its a worthy investment for them, 5 years down the road even 3 depending, they will be making 90k, 5-7 years down the road, 150k. Its not much a problem for them to spend 5k for 3 years, if they need to, they can even stretch out their legs for 5 years on those systems if the system is expandable enough.
Last edited:
Where do Intel's lesser 6 and 8 core chips fit in? Surely Ryzen could take at least that segment, though I don't agree everyone in the professional field is willing to spend much more to receive marginal gains.
Well They fit in there too, SkyLake X 6 core should be able to perform like Ryzen's 8 core with out the game performance hits. Then the Skylake 8 core will be above, then you got the 10 core. As long as Intel keeps its pricing scheme the same 6 core at 600 bucks, now if they start dropping prices a bit.... Not too much just 100 bucks (I don't expect them to do this though)
Its not marginal gains, photoshop, creating a website, each layer takes up around 50 mb, that is without the undo's, and filters needs and what not. Creating just a website, would need hundreds of layers, like in the neighborhood of 400 to 500. Then double that for actually use of photoshop. You are looking 64 gigs as mandatory. 32 gigs you might be able to get away with by having multiple set up files just increase the person screws up he can go back. This is why even smaller adverting agencies I worked for all their dev's and artists would be on mac pro towers (now they have switched to I Mac, as the cylider mac pro's were shunned). Dual Xeon's with yeah 64 gigs or more memory.
If we're including yet to come Skylake X we can include upcomming >64 GB support Ryzen CPUs. We have yet to see the relative performance and pricing of those. Even then, there is market to be taken between 4 core and >8 core >64 GB systems.
DuronBurgerMan
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,341
Not necessarily. I'm a freelancer/consultant doing a lot of sh*t. UI Development, Graphic Design, Video & Audio Mastering... a long list of sh*t. I make around $160k/year, and have been doing this shit since the late 90s. And I saw no reason to get spendy on a Broadwell-E rig for my primary workstation since Ryzen was available, and was about as fast as the 8 core Broadwell part for most of that sh*t. I'm very careful about my business expenditures, and look for the maximum value in price/performance. I don't go for maximum cheapness, but neither do I go for maximum performance. I look for the sweet spot in the middle. Ryzen is one hell of a value in that context.
If you're a studio that makes millions, then the cost difference between Ryzen and Broadwell-E is trivial. If you're an independent guy, like me, the cost difference is most assuredly not trivial.
Before Ryzen, the decision for the new build was damned hard. 7700k, 6850k or 6900k. Each one had a major downside. 6900k was overpriced, 7700k was slower in multi-threaded tasks by a lot, 6850k split the difference, but was still overpriced, and the 7700k approached it in some multi-threaded workloads out of sheer clock speed and IPC improvement over Broadwell. Ryzen? A perfect sweet spot, man. Only caveat was that sometimes I use the workstation for gaming, too, in the off hours. So I took a bit of a hit there. But would rather take it there, than to my wallet, or to my work.
Of course, if Intel had a 6-core Kaby Lake/Skylake for me at a reasonable price... maybe they would have got my business.
DuronBurgerMan
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,341
Depends on the work. 32GB is fine for me (though in the future I may consider 64 - I got two DIMMs instead of 4 for a reason, after all). But most of my photoshop work is doing UI mockups and site and/or ad banner designs. None of these consume an inordinate amount of RAM. Now... print advertising, due to the higher DPI... that can eat memory quick. But the market for that sh*t ain't what it used to be.
Also, a lot of folks don't get how the swap files work. In many cases, print advertising (or, for me, when doing video editing) can consume even more than 64GB. Or 128GB. Or any reasonable amount of RAM, really. But the solution for this isn't to just keep getting spendy on RAM, unless your budget is unlimited. The solution is to get one hell of a fast (and large) boot SSD for the swap file. I picked up a 1TB Plextor MP8e NVMe drive, and I keep most of it available for swapping. Only the Samsung 960 lines are faster (and not by much). So on the off chance I hit the paging file, I'm not eating a heavy performance loss. If your paging file is on a slow drive, you're f*cked.
So if you're building a workstation, and you aren't spending an unlimited amount of money, the best value is to pick up a Ryzen, slap 32GB or 64GB on it, grab a FAST 1TB NVMe drive, and pair it with a powerful graphics card like a 1080 Ti (remember, most of this sh*t can be sped up by a good GPU, too). You'll have most of the performance of a good Broadwell-E workstation for one hell of a lot less money.
Look I do a ton of 3d work and 2d work at home for work, and I have a dual broad well xeon 10 core. I didn't go with the regular Intel X chips cause to get just one 10 core would have been 1700 bucks, the 2 xeons I got were 1k a piece. So end results I got 20 cores at 2.9 ghz (boost) for work and when I do game on my workstation, which is rare, I usually use my skylake machine, it does things fine with 10 core, not the best but gets the job done. Usually only play diablo 3 on it anyways. My skylake system it has all the high intensity games.
Now if you want an 10 core xeon at 2.0 ghz boosts up to 3 or more ghz, its only 600 bucks.
As stated above, I would go with the dual xeon 10 core at lower frequencies you can get a workstation grade motherboard and double up on CPU's for the the same cost as one Broadwell -e 6900.
http://ark.intel.com/products/92981/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2630-v4-25M-Cache-2_20-GHz
I have 128 gigs in my system and dude let me tell ya that was more expensive then the cpu's and motherboard, add all the damn components, but I got through my work place so I got a discount on all the parts.
Even as a consultant, you should ask the company you are consulting for and ask them to get you the system, you pay for it, but get their corporate discount, you will save 30-50% depending on the company you are consulting for. They will do it. I did when I worked for y&r I was a freelancer producer for their medical commercials, first job in NYC, I asked them if they could do that, they said yeah any thing you see as a corporate discount for employees goes over to consultants and freelancers. I ended up getting a Mac Pro tower dual Penryn for 5k which list price was 7.5k +1k for the 30 inch monitor, so 8.5k. Got it through tek serve, so had to pay tax but yeah it worth it.
Last edited:
DuronBurgerMan
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,341
I feel like this is deja vu, because I just had this conversation not long ago... and it may have even been with you. But I've no particular need to have two separate boxes, one for gaming and one for work. Double the price when I can do it all in one just fine. For me, gaming is not as much as a going concern as it used to be anyway, so it's hard to even justify building a box just for gaming anymore. But it's important enough to warrant making sure the rig can do it when I want it to.
No need. Picked up a Ryzen 1700X for $389, clocked it near 4GHz. Maybe I can squeeze more out of it later, but so far I'm very happy with it. Cheap and fast.
DuronBurgerMan
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,341
As for Skylake-X, well a 6 core Skylake-X would have been very interesting for me. But my old 2600k box was on its last legs, and quite frankly, I wasn't going to wait around much longer to replace it. That sh*t's been running as my primary rig for 6 years. It was time to go. There's always something better tomorrow.
If Intel had a 6 core Skylake or Kaby Lake for, say, $500-$600ish, at ~4GHz, I'd have gone that route for sure, Ryzen or no.
If Intel had a 6 core Skylake or Kaby Lake for, say, $500-$600ish, at ~4GHz, I'd have gone that route for sure, Ryzen or no.
Telling ya man you should get into the corporate discount databases of any corporation you consult or freelance for, they will let ya do it, and after that entire life time you can get their discounts, cause that database is separate from their employee database for the most part
. Where I work for now, a bit harder, everything is tied to my id card which well can't really get around that.DuronBurgerMan
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,341
Telling ya man you should get into the corporate discount databases of any corporation you consult or freelance for, they will let ya do it, and after that entire life time you can get their discounts, cause that database is separate from their employee database for the most part
Some of my customers give me discounts on sh*t. I suppose if I wanted oil drilling equipment on the cheap right now, I could probably get it. Lol.
I absolutely disagree. In any business, lowering your fixed costs is part and parcel of staying in business. The current offerings don't meet my RAM requirements. A single socket Naples will probably do it at considerably less than an Intel equivalent. Even if I gave up 20 per cent on RAW processing, it wouldn't matter if the price was right.
What you're proposing is extending expenditure based on projection, a move that's seen a lot of bankruptcies. That's just bad fiscal management unless you're an LLC.
No I'm not, also by introducing more than one type of system in a single company, also increases costs associated with infrastructure and cost of the components. For example, my friend IT manager North East America of Cargill, will not use AMD systems or servers because the cost of introducing them into their line up will increase the costs of Intel components because now they are dividing their acquisition figures and on their server side the addition infrastructure costs will be increased too. Now if the performance can't be denied, yes then there is a need to introduce those chips and platforms into the work place.
This is why it took AMD so long to make Opteron in roads into the server market, Intel wasn't doing any special kick backs to large corporations (outside of the regular volume discounts they were already getting) when it came to servers.
There is a line between extending expenditure based on projection vs. overhead associated with mixed systems.
Corporations aren't like you and I were the bottom line end cost of system is what matters, its the cost of everything from A to Z is what matters. Loosing 20% on Raw processing power that is 20% increase on a workers time isn't it? What happens then a job that should take lets say 100 hours now takes 120 hours. A person getting paid lets say 50 bucks an hour, who would get normally 5000 bucks, is now getting 6000 bucks. Well does the cost saves of going the route of getting a system that has 20% less raw processing power helpful? That 500 bucks on the CPU now became $500 additional.
if you ever talk to a person that makes a sh*t ton of money, and they say something like this
"I don't care about the price, my time is more valuable" there is a reason why they say that, cause 1 hour of their time is worth a butt load of cash. Corporations, even mom and pop stores you need to look at what is the cost from A to Z from the point of purchase to the end results what the costs will be, not just the point of purchase.
Corporations don't get their computer components at the rates we do either. I stated this before Intel 7k chips, yeah the crazy 22 core xeons, corporations get them at 60% of the cost for volume buyers. Even their 10 core xeons.
My broadwell e dual 10 core cost me 2500 bucks with 32 gigs of ram. A hell of a lot less then it should have been by 50%. if people are getting things for work, well buying it themselves, well better get a corporate discount. Cuase its not hurting anyone, the discounts are there for these corporations because they have volume.
Last edited:
DuronBurgerMan
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,341
There's a flaw in the logic there. Losing 20% of raw processing power does *not* mean the worker is 20% less productive. That would assume 24/7 (or at least all working hours, at a minimum) full 100% load. That almost never happens, outside of dedicated render and server farms (and even then, it's not a desirable condition, and that is largely automated anyway). For example, if a video editor is working on videos, and it takes 20% longer to encode, then the time lost is relative only to that time which he spends encoding... much of which will often happen outside of regular working anyway. For example, if I'm going to go pick up a sandwich for lunch, I'll let the machine render away while I'm gone. Or the same overnight. The actual productivity difference may be very minimal even in a 20% scenario.
It should be noted this is often more of an issue for me, however, due to the way I like to work. But I'm not really a good example. I'm f*cking weird.
And when it comes to certain tasks, Ryzen is definitely NOT 20% slower than comparable Intel offerings. In some of them, it is equally as fast, and in a few instances, actually faster.
You're right about mixed systems and IT department costs, however, and that's one reason why Intel's lock on the market remained secure even when AMD was making faster chips for less money, during the Athlon days. AMD will never displace Intel in certain areas of the business market unless they are offering solutions that are something like 50% faster for half the price, or something utterly insane like that.
However, AMD's new strategy may be effective competition anyway. Instead of playing for the big business market, they can make a play for the smaller business market by finding nice little niches like Ryzen found. A company with 10 employees as opposed to 10,000, will have a lot more sensitivity to total system price and bang for the buck, and won't have the inflexibility of entrenched IT departments. So smaller companies and independent contractors may find the bang for the buck of Zen very attractive.
Well just using his figures and keeping it simple, even if half that or a quarter, that, most projects that utilize 3d, I'm sure you know this well as a freelancer, you don't just talk to one person, its a team of people, you may only communicate with the project manager but the rest of the team is there too, a producer/project manager, an art director, an account manager, tech team of 2 for front end and back end programming if need be, 1 hour of that teams time is more then the cost of the computer lol.
I mean there is a reason I don't go to meetings about setting up a meeting lol, even told my boss and his boss, I will not go into a meeting that sets up for another meeting, if I get called in and that is what it is I will walk out and have done so many times lol.
DuronBurgerMan
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,341
That's one of the things I love about being independent. I'm paid by the hour. Nobody wants to waste my billable hours.
https://www.purepc.pl/procesory/test_procesora_amd_ryzen_5_1400_konkurent_intel_core_i5_7400
More Pure PC benchmarks, yep Ryzen 5 for the most part performs like a i3, 2 core 4 thread Intel, in games
More Pure PC benchmarks, yep Ryzen 5 for the most part performs like a i3, 2 core 4 thread Intel, in games
OrangeKhrush
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,673
Performs like much higher clocked set of i3's in gaming but like an i7 in workloads. i3's game well due to that lofty clockspeed, but BF1 microstutters.
OrangeKhrush
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,673
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_ryzen_5_1600x__1500x_processor/9.htm
I think the 1600 and 1400 are pretty impressive, the 1600 is the sweet spot in price and performance, very versatile chip depending on the game looks a good buy if you get boards.
I am thinking about a 1600 to replace my 4790
I think the 1600 and 1400 are pretty impressive, the 1600 is the sweet spot in price and performance, very versatile chip depending on the game looks a good buy if you get boards.
I am thinking about a 1600 to replace my 4790
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2011
- Messages
- 10,232
So, many people think Razor1 is anti-AMD, but having seen her/his posts on this forum for a while now, I don't agree. Razor is more focussed on facts regardless of who benefits from the situation. The main issue is that AMD has a very poor relationship with "the facts", and thus Razor seems anti-AMD.
Shintai on the other hand...