AMD 2nd Gen Ryzen 2 2700X Zen+ CPU Review @ [H]

After watching that video... memory prices are retarded. I bought 32GB a year ago for less than a decent 16GB kit today.
 
OnceSetThisCannotChange said:
Well, if you checked the video Steve used Flare X here, with the baseline result representing standard 3200 CL14 (5:30 in the video). If you push the same ram to 3400 speed and use timings from The Stilt, you can net 10 - 15%, in three out of four games.

He promised another test with 30 games, looking forward to seeing those results.
Click to expand...
And unless you are playing at 1080p it makes no difference.....

And if you are playing at 1080p and own 3400 RAM, you likely should have bought a new display instead. Unless of course 1080p low detail gaming is your thing.
 
DuronBurgerMan said:
That's something that's been on my mind lately. The reviews are always "AMD isn't as good as Intel at gaming..." But really thinking about it, the performance gap is irrelevant outside of special edge cases.

Normally we use low-res CPU benchmarks as a predictor of future gaming performance. But with the Core Wars (tm) having started up, future games are likely to be much more threaded than today - since both Intel and AMD are heading in the 'moar cores' direction. Meaning lower low-res *poorly threaded* gaming performance isn't necessarily a good future predictor of gaming performance anymore. The utility of such benchmarks is more academic, than practical.

In very high refresh rate, lower res gaming today, it means something. But that is, quite frankly, an edge case.

This means that, for all intents and purpose, both architectures are well suited for future gaming at equivalent price points. A 1080p gamer is likely to be a budget gamer and will be GPU limited because no 1080 Ti. A 4k gamer is similarly likely to be GPU limited because 4k. Therefore, again, we're back to an edge case that doesn't occur all that often outside of artificial benchmarking. Maybe certain competitive gaming scenarios, but again.. edge case.

So both architectures are roughly equally suitable, save for the fact that Intel tends to win out in certain edge cases - competitive, high refresh rate gaming at lower resolution and, of course, scenarios that leverage AVX512. If you're an edge case user, by all means, buy Intel. If not, either will do. Pick your favorite flavor - you don't even need a reason.
Click to expand...
If only someone would take a deep dive on this over a period of weeks using real world gameplay, we would have real answers.

The Definitive AMD Ryzen 7 Real-World Gaming Guide
With our AMD Ryzen 7 overclocked to 4GHz we find out if this is a competitive real-world gaming CPU or not. We compare it with two overclocked Intel 7700K and 2600K systems across six different video card configurations at 4K, 1440p, and 1080p to find out which CPU provides the best gameplay experience using playable game settings.
 
Remember that the difference doesn't matter if you're only playing games already released and don't upgrade your GPU until your next CPU upgrade. Which is actually pretty common here at [H].

But for most gamers, not quite so much ;)
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Remember that the difference doesn't matter if you're only playing games already released and don't upgrade your GPU until your next CPU upgrade. Which is actually pretty common here at [H].

But for most gamers, not quite so much ;)
Click to expand...

I don't even know what "most gamers" do anymore. I'm barely able to call myself a gamer these days.
 
I am what "they" would refer to as a "potato" .. I don't have a mic yet and play solo .. but this game is great fun .. more than worth the $30 entry fee .. check the bushes around you, I might be in one of them ..
 
Only thing holding me back from upgrading to this from my 3770k is the X470 chipset. It was stupid of them not to upgrade the PCI-E support from 2.0 to 3.0.
 
Bigbacon said:
I ended up not even ocing mine. No point really. It boosts to a solid 4.1 or 4.2 when im gaming. Sits there until im done.
Click to expand...

Seconded. It boosts just fine on it's own and I don't have to screw with it.
 
Hi guys
I recently purchased a ryzen 2700x
I overclocked it to 4.1GHz, it is stable but I have a problem with the voltage jumping up. I will post bios images. What can be done to prevent overvolt?
Level 1 only gives an overvolt, if I select level 2 immediately the voltage drops during load.
In the bios I have a voltage of 1.23125V but in the load (prime95) it rises to 1.261V or 1.28V, is it possible how to prevent this and what settings should I change in the bios and what to set?
Thanks
Motherboard is asrock b450m steel legend, ram patriot viper steel Series 16GB DDR4 3200 MHz CL16 UDIMM 2x8gb
This way I currently have it set up in the bios, the processor is stable except that I have an overvolt, for some bios options I don't know what they do.
I only overclock in the bios.
 

Attachments

  • 210220102008.jpg
    210220102008.jpg
    564.6 KB · Views: 0
  • 210220102015.jpg
    210220102015.jpg
    456.9 KB · Views: 0
  • 210220102024.jpg
    210220102024.jpg
    457.6 KB · Views: 0
  • 210220102029.jpg
    210220102029.jpg
    458.3 KB · Views: 0
  • 210220102111.jpg
    210220102111.jpg
    422.1 KB · Views: 0
  • 210220102118.jpg
    210220102118.jpg
    426.9 KB · Views: 0
  • 210220102135.jpg
    210220102135.jpg
    465.7 KB · Views: 0
  • 210220102141.jpg
    210220102141.jpg
    446.8 KB · Views: 0
  • 210220102200.jpg
    210220102200.jpg
    447.5 KB · Views: 0
  • 210220102240.jpg
    210220102240.jpg
    447.6 KB · Views: 0
Leave load line calibration alone. That's the circuitry that increases voltage to account for the drop caused by load. Complex electronical things.

Most of the time you want ryzen left at stock, precision boost works very well. The amount of tuning and extra cooking required to actually overclock for benefit in my opinion outweighs the tiny clock gains. Others may disagree, YMMV.
 
travm said:
Leave load line calibration alone. That's the circuitry that increases voltage to account for the drop caused by load. Complex electronical things.

Most of the time you want ryzen left at stock, precision boost works very well. The amount of tuning and extra cooking required to actually overclock for benefit in my opinion outweighs the tiny clock gains. Others may disagree, YMMV.
Click to expand...
Just the opposite for me, I have a slightly lower temperature when I overclock manually.
On stock settings the motherboard also gives 1.5v which is a lot too much, it showed me better overclocking.
I only have a problem that under load my voltage rises to 1.26V and in the bios it is 1.23125V, I don't know how to equalize it, let's say that I put 1.26V in the bios and that under load it doesn't grow much over 1.26V,so that the voltage stays approximately the same.
Also the single thread result is slightly smaller but the multi thread is larger than at the factory settings.
 
travm said:
Leave load line calibration alone. That's the circuitry that increases voltage to account for the drop caused by load. Complex electronical things.

Most of the time you want ryzen left at stock, precision boost works very well. The amount of tuning and extra cooking required to actually overclock for benefit in my opinion outweighs the tiny clock gains. Others may disagree, YMMV.
Click to expand...

basically that ^^. on my sig system, ive dropped cpu voltage -0.075, turned on PB0 and upped my ram voltage a bit. thats it and it boosts to 4.25. voltage still fluctuates a bit but thats normal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top