AMD Ryzen 1700X CPU Review @ [H]

Zion Halcyon said:
SO, I don't know who is following the AMD AMA with Lisa Su, but we now have an official answer from the top on the gaming performance:


Thanks for the question. In general, we've seen great performance from SMT in applications and benchmarks but there are some games that are using code optimized for our competitor... we are confident that we can work through these issues with the game developers who are actively engaging with our engineering teams.

​
For what its worth.
Click to expand...

Clearly that is unpossible!
 
noko said:
That is how it sounds to me as well. I am sure AMD will have some kind of response on this in a few days. Maybe a hotfix until Microsoft can do an official fix.

As time goes on and adjustments, fixes, software updates I expect to see better performance.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just don't expect any unless you are on Windows 10 :p
 
I was waiting on benchmarks before I committed to upgrading out of AM3+. I play Games on my desktop at 1080p (and do the occasional rip of a CD), so Ryzen will not be up my alley. Looks like my future is one with a Kaby Lake system.
 
Zion Halcyon said:
SO, I don't know who is following the AMD AMA with Lisa Su, but we now have an official answer from the top on the gaming performance:



For what its worth.
Click to expand...

Must be a lot of games huh. Lame excuses is lame. :)

Just wait...wait and wait.
 
The gaming performance is lack luster... i seem to remember the x480 being called a fail when it first came out, and now its fairing quite well against the 1060 and looking even better for future game engines. Still cannot afford upgrade yet, so ...time is on my side... ♪♪..oh yes it is.... ♪♪
 
Armenius said:
The i7-6900K can go to 4.5 GHz, typically. With a base clock of 3.2 GHz, that is a 40.625% overclock. The R7 1700X does 4.1 GHz with a base clock of 3.4 GHz, which is a 20.589% overclock. The i7-6900K overclocks twice as well as the R7 1700X.
Click to expand...

typically? Please give me solid benchmarks and reviews quoting you.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-broadwell-e-6950x-6900k-6850k-6800k,4587-9.html

toms hardware doesn't bullshit on OC results, these are fully tested and stable. I matched his results for my 6850k. 4.4ghz, above that Its so unstable I didn't even want to bother with shit ton of voltage. So your 4.5ghz typical OC scenario does not work. Heck my 6850 does not go above 4.4ghz. Could one have a golden sample? Yea sure, but typical is hardly the case.

AMD could clock Ryzen at 3.2ghz and people could run golden samples at 4.2 and you all that a good thing? Just because something is clocked lower doesn't mean it overclocks really high lol.

Most people would rather have faster out of the box performance. Intel did 3.2 on 6900k because they had no competition.
 
Fuck yeah
I am upgrading my Server/NAS from Intel to AMD. Easy fucking choice at this price.
 
Last edited:
cptnjarhead said:
The gaming performance is lack luster... i seem to remember the x480 being called a fail when it first came out, and now its fairing quite well against the 1060 and looking even better for future game engines. Still cannot afford upgrade yet, so ...time is on my side... ♪♪..oh yes it is.... ♪♪
Click to expand...

There is something wrong. Most reviewers said it shouldn't be happening. There clearly is something holding back because performance gap is too much, even on the same clock speeds. Looks to me some kind of a bios bug, may be bandwidth issue of some sort.
 
Todd Walter said:
It may. Microcode updates have been a thing for a long time now for both Intel & AMD. It all depends on what is broken on this stepping.
Click to expand...


Up to a certain point, I seriously don't think that is the problem here cause you will see it in applications outside of games if that was the case, we haven't, cause look at 3dmark or any game simulated tests, they are not showing this behavior at all.
 
Dan_D said:
Phenom II and Piledriver haven't been relevant for some time. If Ryzen competes well against anything from Intel from Sandy Bridge onward, that should be all you need to know. An academic asswhipping of those older AMD architectures might be entertaining but hardly useful.
Click to expand...
check out phoronix

Somehow the 1800X performs really well in linux despite lacking kernel support.
 
cptnjarhead said:
The gaming performance is lack luster... i seem to remember the x480 being called a fail when it first came out, and now its fairing quite well against the 1060 and looking even better for future game engines. Still cannot afford upgrade yet, so ...time is on my side... ♪♪..oh yes it is.... ♪♪
Click to expand...


good song, reminds me of the movie Fallen. But no, if what nV's been saying about their next set of drivers, nada on Polaris catching up, and CPU's are a different beast.
 
Last edited:
Todd Walter said:
It may. Microcode updates have been a thing for a long time now for both Intel & AMD. It all depends on what is broken on this stepping.
Click to expand...

Please provide a past example of a microcode update improving performance if a mainstream CPU.
 
Seems like there's a lot of kinks to work out for top notch performance from Ryzen.

Would love to see a "3 month" or "6 month" later review to see if much has changed as far as fixes and updates.
 
God I hate this!

Was really looking forward to an AMD Ryzen build.

However my next build was going to be focused on high single threaded performance.

The fact that Ryzen is below even what I was expecting in single thread performance, I'll either go Kaby Lake or put the build on hold until next gen Intel.

Mind you, if I was going for a general purpose gaming/workstation, 100% I would go Ryzen+1080Ti.
 
Dan_D said:
AMD always said "40% over Excavator." What we got was 52%. I'm not sure what there is to be disappointed about unless you had unrealistic expectations to begin with.
Click to expand...

Maybe I did Dan. I read through your big comment and you make great points. (as always)

Personally, 40% over Excavator doesn't "thrill" me. But it's multi-threaded performance does.
 
thesmokingman said:
o_O
Click to expand...
“Oxide games is incredibly excited with what we are seeing from the Ryzen CPU. Using our Nitrous game engine, we are working to scale our existing and future game title performance to take full advantage of Ryzen and its eight-core, 16-thread architecture, and the results thus far are impressive. These optimizations are not yet available for Ryzen benchmarking. However, expect updates soon to enhance the performance of games like Ashes of the Singularity on Ryzen CPUs, as well as our future game releases.” - Brad Wardell, CEO Stardock and Oxide"
Click to expand...


Oxide games are incredibly excited to perform their duty as glorified extensions of AMD marketing department, as they have done in the past, to no avail whatsoever, because their statements are generally meaningless. It's not like Ryzen supports a groundbreaking new instruction set that will lift performance by large amounts, game developers don't have to do anything. If it's a software issue it will be corrected by BIOS or microcode updates, or windows update if anything
 
Furious_Styles said:
Wow that 2600K @ 4.5ghz is still holding its own.
Click to expand...
Well to me it's more like WOW intel hasn't done too much in improving their cpus over the past years eh.

SilverSliver said:
No one was 4k gaming when FX came out. 4k benchmarks are very close in games, and anything besides gaming Ryzen absolutely destroys Intel for the money.

If you are a CSGOBRO gaming at 640 x 480 at a million frames per second, definitely go Intel. If you are basically anyone else, Ryzen is competitive if not superior for some needs.
Click to expand...
Does it? AMD marketing was very well placed. Yes you're getting the similar performance for half the price as 6900k but intel actually offers the same, Intel's entire x99 platform is bloated pricing with minimal gains.

SilverSliver said:
I think the fair thing to say is that Ryzen is not what you want if you are pushing 1080p at 240hz. If you are using higher resolutions, such as 4k - or do any encoding - Ryzen is the best bang for the buck.
Click to expand...
Higher resolutions only mask that the cpu is not good enough because the gpu starts to bottleneck. Yes good looking games tend to be gpu bottlenecked anyways but that's an excuse for a poor showing not an acceptable answer.

That being said it's still a very attractive multi threaded cpu. Although anyone seriously looking into this cpu for content creation like CAD or adobe stuff etc should really be aware that most of the time clock speed still is king because of gpu acceleration. You actually do have to look into how the program you're using treats gpu acceleration, some programs will punish you for more threads and cores with gpu acceleration on because you have a lower clock because the cpus don't get saturated.

I'm a bit more interested in the 1400x and 1600x that's a bit more mainstream in price and set up to see if it will disrupt the gaming market and a bit of the mid market. That being said the clocks don't seem to be higher so I do wonder if it will be as competitive to the i5's

thesmokingman said:
Game code isn't patched for Ryzen yet and there's obviously a few kinks to work. It's kinda funny you guys act surprised. Some games work better with the high perf windows profile, some work better with SMT disabled, etc... that all screams need moar optimization.
Click to expand...
That's two different things. Is it the games or windows? Game code needs to be patched? That's stilly developers don't give a crap and that's why they use pre packaged engines and write poorly coded games, fun games, but poorly coded. What is a bit more interesting is that SMT disabled with different power profile actually improved results, which could mean windows scheduler doesn't like ryzen power settings. Well more like AMD tune for their core parking isn't enthusiast grade. That being said when was the last time you head of anyone addressing cpu performance though a patch. Bios updates may change how it works but then that's kinda admitting AMD rushed the launch which given the supply it doesn't seem like it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sover
like this
I agree with Dan, there is some bedding in needed, from Bios/firmware to windows and applications, this will take time to materialize.
 
can someone explai wtf is up with hyper pi and wprime? how does a 4.3GHz single thread beat a 5Ghz single thread? And how does a 4 core beat an 8 core?
 
NKD said:
There is something wrong. Most reviewers said it shouldn't be happening. There clearly is something holding back because performance gap is too much, even on the same clock speeds. Looks to me some kind of a bios bug, may be bandwidth issue of some sort.
Click to expand...

Yes, because it clearly cant be possible. I think you are suffering from the 5 stages of grief.
 
I can understand each gamer may have different criteria. Mine was easy - VR and my resolution and refresh rate I game at which would be 3440x1440 60hz on the rig Ryzen will be using. Those that game at 144hz 1080p and maybe even 1440p 144hz and that really game mostly -> Does not sound like Ryzen would be your best solution -> Intel sounds like a better solution. Go for what will give you the best benefit. My other stuff 3d, video editing, animation etc. and of course gaming on the Vive and current monitor Ryzen is just unbeat from what I can see for the price. I also have an I7 rig anyways but more a experiment then a productive work endeavour.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
THis is interesting. It suggests some further tweaking of the windows scheduler and Ryzen drivers may be needed.
Click to expand...

It's not all that unheard of. When benching the old 5960X, scores improve by a good amount (haven't put a pencil to it to claim 15%, just that they are noticeably higher) with "High Performance" vs "Balanced".
 
I agree with Dan, there is some bedding in needed, from Bios/firmware to windows and applications, this will take time to materialize. Intel core arch is what 7 Gens plus 2 if you consider X58 and 1156, the arch is well run in and there is little adoption needed. Bulldozer after some updates improved a lot once it was bedded in and Ryzen will be the same. It is going to be a hard month but have to go though it. The fact that SMT is affecting the game reminds me of the Battlefield 4 bug where disabling HT boosted your performance considerably
 
Shintai said:
Ryzen isn't going to do that. Its simply too pricy and too poor for that.
Click to expand...

you are so damn dilusional. Did you see all the multithreaded results. Ryzen is too pricy when it matches a $1000 chip or beats it for $500. Your love for intel is going to give you a heart break one day. Try thinking for a second $500 is half of $1000. Try it again.
 
Shintai said:
Yes, because it clearly cant be possible. I think you are suffering from the 5 stages of grief.
Click to expand...
You are funny, yes Ryzen doesn't kick Intel balls on everything yet it gives Intel a rather big black eye on many things :LOL:.
 
Semantics said:
Well to me it's more like WOW intel hasn't done too much in improving their cpus over the past years eh.
Click to expand...

When Intel / NVidia products hold up well over time, it's due to a lack of innovation. When AMD products hold up well over time, it's due to the "aging like fine wine", and their awesome driver team's hard work.
 
NKD said:
There is something wrong. Most reviewers said it shouldn't be happening. There clearly is something holding back because performance gap is too much, even on the same clock speeds. Looks to me some kind of a bios bug, may be bandwidth issue of some sort.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it is clear that something is wrong.

In single threaded Cinebench Ryzen is pretty much matching a Skylake i5-6600K, so we know the thread performance is there. It has twice the cores and 4 times the threads of a 6600k though, and while more cores don't always add to the performance in games, they never - in my experience - hurt.

This is a brand new architecture, and this is something we haven't seen in some time. Intel's designs have used incremental improvements on previous designs for decades. It is only to be expected that there will be some teething problems for a brand new from scratch architecture.

It sounds to me like the Windows scheduler isn't fully optimized for handling Ryzen's SMT setup yet. We also know that there are some BIOS patches coming down the pike to deal with - among other things - RAM clock issues, which we are told currently only hit 2133 (accurate? I'd have to re-read the review) but should be able to hit 3000+.

So, over the next couple of months, I think we'll see OS patches, driver updates and BIOS updates that will improve the situation. The question will be, just HOW much of a difference will these result in.
 
Shintai said:
Yes, because it clearly cant be possible. I think you are suffering from the 5 stages of grief.
Click to expand...

I am fine. I am rocking a 6850k at 4.4ghz. Anything else? I am just not AMD hater like you. That much is evident. You can't even admit ryzen is competitive because it hurts your intel owned heart. My only grief is I kinda feel bad for you since you are so ignorant..
 
  • Like
Reactions: isp
like this
NKD said:
There is something wrong. Most reviewers said it shouldn't be happening. There clearly is something holding back because performance gap is too much, even on the same clock speeds. Looks to me some kind of a bios bug, may be bandwidth issue of some sort.
Click to expand...


That problem with that is its only happening in games, why? This is not API related, cause if it was it would show up in anything that uses DX or Vulkan etc. So now OS related, probably not, cause AMD has had quite a bit of time to tell MS what needs to be done, its not done in a closed box, nor will AMD not send MS samples to ensure things are running well. App specific related, well its only happening in games, I would think it would happen else were too if it was programming side.

Nope its something to do with Ryzen and its architecture.
 
ole-m said:
check out phoronix

Somehow the 1800X performs really well in linux despite lacking kernel support.
Click to expand...
Good grief!! As a Linux user those results are quite nice!

In terms of gaming, while I do game I just don't need the highest framerates. All of the other things I do such as video encoding, and VM's could all benefit quite nicely by going with a Ryzen 1800x. I'm currently on an Ivy 6 core so if I want an 8 core I'm going to pay way more to stick with Intel anyway. My expectations weren't out of this world so I'm quite pleased with the results. It's pretty much what I wanted. Performance between Ivy and Haswell with more cores at a cheap price.
 
Investors seem to shy away from AMD stock after a lot of the reviewers reported lower gaming results. So at least the idea of gaming capability matters to some, and possibly why Lisa Su addressed it.

Shares of AMD fall after gaming performance of new processors disappoints.

"Advanced Micro Devices shares dipped on Thursday after the launch of their new Ryzen line of desktop CPUs disappointed, with some technology reviewers unhappy about the poor gaming performance."

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/02/shar...pu-disappoints-with-gaming-performance-.html?
 
Any thoughts on a "frames per dollar" evaluation that might show the value of a CPU based on how many frames you get per dollar spent? Taking the [H] numbers and dividing by retail price (newegg/amazon) this is what i came up with:

CPU price lp uni bio metro aots
1700x 400 0.82 0.71 0.88 0.42 0.10
7700k 350 1.1 1.24 1.36 0.56 0.12
6900k 1050 0.46 0.34 0.44 0.22 0.05
2600k 280 1.078 1.13 1.27 0.57 0.11


This kind of shows that dollar-for-dollar the 7700k is probably the best performer (excluding the cost of the rest of the platform).
 
also doe this suffer from penalties when a process goes from 1 set to the other set of cores? This is really 2x4core package right vs a single 8 core CPU?
 
razor1 said:
That problem with that is its only happening in games, why? This is not API related, cause if it was it would show up in anything that uses DX or Vulkan etc. So now OS related, probably not, cause AMD has had quite a bit of time to tell MS what needs to be done, its not done in a closed box, nor will AMD not send MS samples to ensure things are running well. App specific related, well its only happening in games, I would think it would happen else were too if it was programming side.

Nope its something to do with Ryzen and its architecture.
Click to expand...

Why not wait to to see what the issue is? Other review sites clearly said it feels like a bug of some kind. Others got better performance if they disabled SMT. This was issue with hyper threading in early days so yea I have heard of this sort of stuff before.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Yeah, just don't expect any unless you are on Windows 10 :p
Click to expand...
Hey, Did you forget us the better mankind on Linux ?........
I am deeply disappointed - Anyways, have you checked out phoronix for their results, no gaming there but that was quite good vs the 7700K in pretty much everything...

Zarathustra[H] said:
Yeah, it is clear that something is wrong.

In single threaded Cinebench Ryzen is pretty much matching a Skylake i5-6600K, so we know the thread performance is there. It has twice the cores and 4 times the threads of a 6600k though, and while more cores don't always add to the performance in games, they never - in my experience - hurt.

This is a brand new architecture, and this is something we haven't seen in some time. Intel's designs have used incremental improvements on previous designs for decades. It is only to be expected that there will be some teething problems for a brand new from scratch architecture.

It sounds to me like the Windows scheduler isn't fully optimized for handling Ryzen's SMT setup yet. We also know that there are some BIOS patches coming down the pike to deal with - among other things - RAM clock issues, which we are told currently only hit 2133 (accurate? I'd have to re-read the review) but should be able to hit 3000+.

So, over the next couple of months, I think we'll see OS patches, driver updates and BIOS updates that will improve the situation. The question will be, just HOW much of a difference will these result in.
Click to expand...

We may be missing a bit of performance but I assume we won't see ryzen surpassing intel in Gaming but closer to matching at best
for SMT - I'm still struggling with a Xeon 2680 V2 with SMT in some use case scenario and, Intel have had SMT for a gamer kids lifetime!
So it's not to be unexpected that SMT can be improved and improve results by upto 5-7% as some report.

I hope this is true for the future competition which I hope will go on.
The Ryzen CPU as is seems to be well beyond expectations really, who would have thought we'd see something from amd again that actually can compete and trade blows... very unexpected if you asked me 2 months back :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top