Terrible gaming experience with Ryzen 1700

Xa3phod

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Messages
170
Well, I don't know what I'm doing wrong. It sucks at gaming.

Ryzen 1700 OC to 3.9Ghz
8 gigs DDR4-3200 (Some name brand, can't remember, but its good!)
2 SSD. One for OS one for games
R9-Fury X (I also tried a Vega 56).

Are there settings I am totally missing? I compare it to my I7 6700K OCed to 4.5Ghz with the same Vega 56.

The I7 just beats the pants off the Ryzen 1700. I am running a 75hz monitor, so I only need to max out 75fps, but the Ryen feels like a dud!
 
That combo should be fine. Run 3dmark and see how your score compares to other similar systems.

Lucky for you it’s on sale right now for $4.50

This will let you see what component is underperforming

You'll get CPU scores and GPU score and overall total system score as three distinct scores. It also tracks heat and FPS over time so you can see if anything is throttling on your major components.
You can also compare your system easily to many other systems worldwide with the same or similar components and determine if you are in the bell curve for performance expectations based on your specific hardware. As a frequent performance system builder - I've found this tool exceptional to make sure any new system I build is performing optimally, and stably. Any system I build I'll run the stress tests and make sure the hardware/overclock stands up to looping stress tests and heat buildup.

 
Last edited:
You made a post with little to no info. Common! What is the issue? Maybe it would help explain what the exact issue is? What does beating the pants off Ryzen mean? Give some numbers, your experience. Otherwise it just becomes a rant.

If I had to guess its probably the ram. Is it single stick? AMD CPUs are more memory hungry so dual channel is probably a must and I am not sure if I would recommend 8GB of ram for gaming these days it could easily be a bottleneck.

Also like to add as others have mentioned, unless you manually set the speed of the ram to 3200 its likely running at 2100mhz. Which will really hurt ryzen chips. They are hungry for faster ram.
 
Last edited:
I have owned a 7820x delidded and OCd to 4.8ghz al 8 cores and I cant tell the difference between it and my 2600x and 2950x in games and I have gsync 3440 at 100hz and gsync 240hz displays.

1700x is a slower chip. But not that damn slow in games.

Or get a non controversial RX 580 with extras..err vega 56

The fury is even a worse GPU and can barely keep up with a 1060 6gb by modern standards.

Also 8gb single stick at default 2100mhz is probably punishing your system. I make this assumption on your claim of just 8gb as well as your lack of knowledge of the brand.

Thus I recommend...

16gb dual chan at 3000mhz XMP. (Yup your gonna have to go into the bios to enable xmp or manually select your speeds. All ram defaults to 2100mhz out of the box regardless of what's stamped on the package. That is the jdec specified speed for ddr4)
1070 or greater GPU
Ryzen 2600x or keep the 1700x
Smile
 
Last edited:
AMD has always been very sensitive to low memory latencies and high memory speed. XMP is off by default. If you don't turn it on on XMP (and possibly tweak it a bit) it doesn't matter how good your memory is, the timings will be set to plain-jane hard-coded jedec settings which are damn slow. If you aren't running dual channel, you are using only half of the memory speed capability. If your games can't handle the number of cores you are using, switch your system to GAME MODE which will reduce your cores and tailor the settings to gaming.

If you are overclocking your system I am assuming you have some idea how to do all of this.
 
You made a post with little to no info. Common! What is the issue? Maybe it would help explain what the exact issue is? What does beating the pants off Ryzen mean? Give some numbers, your experience. Otherwise it just becomes a rant.

If I had to guess its probably the ram. Is it single stick? AMD CPUs are more memory hungry so dual channel is probably a must and I am not sure if I would recommend 8GB of ram for gaming these days it could easily be a bottleneck.

Also like to add as others have mentioned, unless you manually set the speed of the ram to 3200 its likely running at 2100mhz. Which will really hurt ryzen chips. They are hungry for faster ram.


2 sticks of DDR4-3200 ram (8 gigs total). I have it set to XMS.
The 1700 is overclocked to 3.9Ghz - completely stable
GPU is a R9-Fury X
PSU is 600Watt EVGA 80Bronze



I do have 16 gigs of DDR4-3000. will 16 gigs of 3000 be better than 8 gigs of 3200? I don't think I'm using all the 8gigs.
I play mostly Planetside 2 with some Battlefield 5. Will also play StarCitizen.
 
I have owned a 7820x delidded and OCd to 4.8ghz al 8 cores and I cant tell the difference between it and my 2600x and 2950x in games and I have gsync 3440 at 100hz and gsync 240hz displays.

1700x is a slower chip. But not that damn slow in games.

Or get a non controversial RX 580 with extras..err vega 56

The fury is even a worse GPU and can barely keep up with a 1060 6gb by modern standards.

Also 8gb single stick at default 2100mhz is probably punishing your system. I make this assumption on your claim of just 8gb as well as your lack of knowledge of the brand.

Thus I recommend...

16gb dual chan at 3000mhz XMP. (Yup your gonna have to go into the bios to enable xmp or manually select your speeds. All ram defaults to 2100mhz out of the box regardless of what's stamped on the package. That is the jdec specified speed for ddr4)
1070 or greater GPU
Ryzen 2600x or keep the 1700x
Smile

have 8 gigs of dual channel 3200 atm and its set to XMS.
 
have 8 gigs of dual channel 3200 atm and its set to XMS.

75 hz and you cant peg that?

My 2600x and 1070ti can go over 170 fps in many games at high or ultra settings on my 1080p at 240hz. I dont know what's holding you back.

Possibly your GPU?

Did you swap from your i7 to 1700x but keep the OS without reinstalling?

That could be an issue. Maybe a clean install?
 
Yeah, there are plenty of cpu and memory benchmarks to make sure that your system is running correctly. Also, check bios/drivers/windows updates. For now, it is a useless thread.
 
75 hz and you cant peg that?

My 2600x and 1070ti can go over 170 fps in many games at high or ultra settings on my 1080p at 240hz. I dont know what's holding you back.

Possibly your GPU?

Did you swap from your i7 to 1700x but keep the OS without reinstalling?

That could be an issue. Maybe a clean install?


I am with Tangoseal on the OS. If you just swapped the board and cpu without doing a fresh install of windows you are going to be gimped.
 
You bought an A320 motherboard ?
https://cpuid.com
Download that check the memory.

All I can think of is that your system must be throttling like crazy. Either ram or motherboard or both, unless your cpu is broken.
 
Another vote for clean install if you haven't already.

I have a 1700 running in one of my boxes (my second most often used) and it runs fine and feels about the same as my other newer / more powerful boxes (see sig).

Also Fury X vs Vega 56 ... why?
 
sounds to me like his pegging vram then pegging dram then pegging ssd..... but he really hasnt seemed to have given any real indication of whats actually happening, nor provided any sort of benchmarks across ram/cpu/gpu, or temps
 
So yeah, low posts count, almost no "vital" information... and an alarming thread title.
As mentioned above, please provide more information (go above to read what) so we can help.

Also, major HW swap ideally should thru clean install as mentioned.

Given the lack info I assume OP has limited / new experience, please go read on ESD and make sure you observe proper precaution when working on electronic device (Please do not flame me, this may be a "potential" culprit. Trying to help).
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
What graphical settings are you trying to play at in the games you listed? Planet Side should make it fine with that hardware.

BFV eh I don't own it but on lower settings thanks to the GPU.

Star Citizen, 8 GB of ram? Get more. They put in OCS client side recently so it does utilize the CPU a lot more than ever before but still not taxing of a GPU that much but even then the older GPU can be a limiting factor but 8GB is just too little. The difference between 3000 and 3200 is negligible and not at all better than doubling your capacity.

Benchmarks are overrated and meh IMO.
 
A clean install doesn't hurt, especially when going from Intel to AMD or vice versa. It is an easy enough thing to do.

Yup, it doesn't hurt, but it's utterly pointless and a waste of time. Many people would rather not reinstall a bunch of apps and reactivate them. This thinking is leftover from old days and it's ridiculous it is still being recommended. It's like the same advice as "oh your computer is slow? run a virus scan and adware" - just a dumb bandaid that doesn't fix anything and offers only placebo.
 
In the Windows XP days, yes. Even on Win7, you do not need to reinstall from swapping a mobo to a new platform. This is horrible advice.
I went from Athlon64 through C2D, C2Q, 2500K, 2600K, 6600K to 6700K on the same install, some CPUs had multiple mobos and it also worked out great.
But when an issue rears its ugly head that isnt straight forward, its worth trying a fresh install if for no other reason, to see if that helps at all.
It might even be the solution and could in no small part guide toward a faster solution.
Its a quick test on a spare drive.
 
Yes. Furmark, heaven/valley, realbench all free we need some numbers here to see what may be the source of the problem.
I have to agree, benchmarks or some numbers would really help understand the reported poor performance is. There is no where near enough information to draw any sort of conclusion or provide guidance on.
 
In the Windows XP days, yes. Even on Win7, you do not need to reinstall from swapping a mobo to a new platform. This is horrible advice.
I always re-install my OS when switching platforms.

Your opinion on this is clearly novice, though the newer OSes are slightly ore tolerant than the old.

The device drivers all leave their footprint from the old system. The registry gets cluttered. You'll notice a general performance improvement in re-installing windows - certainly on Windows 7 - especially between AMD/Nvidia. The failure to re-install after a vendor change can even affect stability. Yes, even on Windows 10. I had three really lightweight crypto mining Windows 10 installs, and figured I could get away with just swapping the video cards on Windows 10, since the machine was so lightwieght. Just AMD video cards, drivers, and Nicehash installed, along with Awesomeminer, and Afterburner. That's it, nothing else installed. I moved those three machines to Nvidia cards and had all kinds of weird problems (difficult to diagnose errors, WHEA errors on the PCI-E bus, overclock issue failures, blue screens, long pauses where you couldn't move the mouse reboots, until I reinstalled Windows 10. Then no problems for months on end, actually nearly a year without problems on those same boards. Same motherboards. The OS reinstalls fixed the issue.

So I'd venture to go so far as to say even if you swap vendors on your graphics card you should reload your OS based on that experience in the last year. Though re-installing after a single graphics card vendor swap isn't as necessary as it is when you swap Motherboard/CPU vendor/chipset. If you don't change chipset and only update the CPU - no reason to reinstall. If you just upgrade in the same family on the video card - say NVidia, to Nvidia, no reason to re-install your OS, but when you change vendors -- it's time to reinstall.

Source of opinion: I do this for a job, volunteer to administer a small domain system at Church, and sell systems on the side as a hobby.

I've imaged many more systems than most. In one year alone working on a helpdesk I imaged over 880 systems.
 
Last edited:
Yeah you can probably fix all problems without re-imaging but imaging is still far faster than lurking forums and trying a gazillions things most of the time and have the bonus of yielding potentially better performance (If you think otherwise fine, but we see daily people arguing for 3fps over videocard canned benchmark... pretty sure a fresh install of W7 over a 4 years old install will give back more than 3fps). Also, most people here have things locked in VM so re-imaging is pretty straight forward... 2~3hours and it's all back and running with latest BIOS/Drivers and clean OS.

Given the fact that OP can't provide appropriate details, re-imaging is the fastest and easiest route. Feel free to play ping pong in replies.
Happy new year :)
 
How lazy are we these days? In the Win9x days I would reformat quarterly for bitrot. Given that most games are software downloads these days, it's quite easy to just install the clients and download. A nice fresh installation is always a good idea.. Even when it's not ;)
 
Guys, its a fresh install of Windows 10 64bit. Clean install of the Radeon drivers. Using Radeon Master to Overclock to 3.9Ghz. What other benchmarks do you want?

Planetside 2 runs mostly over 60fps, it hits 75fps, but rarely stays there.

Cinebench:
openGL:110.98FPS.
CPU: 1741
CPU-single: 161

GeekBench:
Sincle core: 4600
Multi core: 147484

Valley(1080P medium) : 5443

Blender BMW test:
CPU: 4:33:34
GPU: 9:29:36

Superposition (1080P Extreme): 3329

Timespy: 6901

Heaven: 3724

Any other benchmarks?

Happy New Years!
 
im not sure there is a issue, I just ran heaven and got 2600 ish with the system in sig..... ultra settings 1080p extreme tessellation....timespy im pulling about 6400-6500
cinebench im pulling 1391...
 
The 6700k is a faster processor with less cores. The 1700 is a slower processor with more cores. It will be slower in single threaded games but should be faster in games/applications that take advantage of all the cores. I'm not sure why anyone would upgrade from a 6700k to a ryzen 1700 for gaming. That's just silly. Almost all games you are going to see a loss in performance as most games won't take advantage of all 8 cores/16 threads.... Did you do any research before you bought this?
 
Try the 16gb 3000mhz kit, make sure they're in the correct slots for dual channel operation and report back. At 75hz the amd cpu should have zero issue, it's usually not a limiting issue vs intel until 120+ fps.
 
The 6700k is a faster processor with less cores. The 1700 is a slower processor with more cores. It will be slower in single threaded games but should be faster in games/applications that take advantage of all the cores. I'm not sure why anyone would upgrade from a 6700k to a ryzen 1700 for gaming. That's just silly. Almost all games you are going to see a loss in performance as most games won't take advantage of all 8 cores/16 threads.... Did you do any research before you bought this?

This is true, but at 75hz it shouldn't matter tbh.
 
The 6700k is a faster processor with less cores. The 1700 is a slower processor with more cores. It will be slower in single threaded games but should be faster in games/applications that take advantage of all the cores. I'm not sure why anyone would upgrade from a 6700k to a ryzen 1700 for gaming. That's just silly. Almost all games you are going to see a loss in performance as most games won't take advantage of all 8 cores/16 threads.... Did you do any research before you bought this?


That’s not his problem. And yea in general 6700k is better for gaming. I don’t buy this argument for a second that oh somehow gaming experience is so miserable on AMD you shouldn’t touch it for gaming. Yea ram configuration can hurt AMD big time. So you have to know that ahead of time. But Ryzen makes a good all around system for anyone.
 
slower core performance + game not able to take advantage of all cores = slower performance
not really rocket science


Using 3dmark which is mostly a gpu benchmhark is a bad way to compared it
3dbechmarks is NOT system game performance
which is why proper sits ( hardocp) dropped using it for a measure of gaming performance along time ago

its like trying to run a disk benchmark to compared the CPU's
 
Last edited:
That’s not his problem. And yea in general 6700k is better for gaming. I don’t buy this argument for a second that oh somehow gaming experience is so miserable on AMD you shouldn’t touch it for gaming. Yea ram configuration can hurt AMD big time. So you have to know that ahead of time. But Ryzen makes a good all around system for anyone.
It's not that it's bad, it's just that a 6700k is a better processor for gaming because it has better single core and quad core performance. I don't think OP has any actual issue. I think he's just expecting that a slower CPU is somehow better because it's newer... Also worth mentioning that 8gb of ram is barely enough for games in 2018 2019

also OP make sure you install the chipset driver from AMD.
 
Back
Top