AMD Ryzen 6 Core and 4 Core Benchmark Leaks Rumor

Discussion in '[H]ard|OCP Front Page News' started by cageymaru, Feb 17, 2017.

  1. cageymaru

    cageymaru [H]ard|News Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,140
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Some interesting AMD Ryzen benchmark images from China have leaked onto the internet. These pertain to the single core and multithread capabilities of the processor. Of course WCCFTECH was quick to capture them before the posts in the Chinese forums were erased. Remember that this is all rumor mill stuff; wait for the official benchmarks before getting too excited. Wonder how they compare to Intel's Kaby Lake offerings? Post your numbers in the discussion thread link below.

    The performance of the chip was tested in CPU-z with the in-built bench utility. This utility helps evaluate the single and multi-threaded performance of the processor running on the PC. The Ryzen 5 1600X had a score of 1888 in single-threaded performance bench and 12544 points in multi-threaded performance bench. In the task manager, we can see that the chip has boost clock enabled since it is clocking beyond it’s base frequency (e.g. 3.56 GHz).
     
  2. Pieter3dnow

    Pieter3dnow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,469
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    If XFR is working then that would allow certain things to be skewed heavily.
    If XFR is withing TDP then it prolly is going to have less impact if the constraints are without TDP limit and just go with thermal limits certain coolers would be way better for performance (water vs air) then others.
     
  3. SixFootDuo

    SixFootDuo 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,909
    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Everyone already knows the single core performance is not as good as intel. Not bad but not as good.

    What I am going to do is wait until Intel drops it's prices and move to a higher end CPU. Intel is still king.
     
    d50man likes this.
  4. cageymaru

    cageymaru [H]ard|News Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,140
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    If I were Intel, I would state that my single core performance is better than AMD Ryzen. Thus there is no need to lower my prices. :)
     
  5. SixFootDuo

    SixFootDuo 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,909
    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Intel can spend a lot of time and money re-educating the public but it won't. People aren't going to understand it has slightly better single core performance or what that even means.

    Perception .... the simple fact that the media has already reported this to have excellent performance ( and in a lot of ways it does ) is good enough for the general public. The average kid or dad or mom or whomever is not going to fact check or dig in and do the benchmarks. The media is in a lot of ways the final word.

    Intel will def have a response very soon. A lot of people are going to be upgrading to Ryzen. Trust me, Intel will be there to intercept as many people as it can and to hopefully sell them their Intel part instead of letting them buy Ryzen. I wouldn't be surprised if they are cranking up the printing presses right now on the 6800 and 6950.

    "A wise man knows that half a potato is better than nothing"
     
    Alfred The Grey and cageymaru like this.
  6. Quartz-1

    Quartz-1 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,942
    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    If they're all much of a muchness then it's going to come down to price. And Intel has deeper pockets than AMD.
     
    daglesj likes this.
  7. daglesj

    daglesj 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,888
    Joined:
    May 7, 2005
    AMD still means zero in the consumer arena and pretty much the same in the Corporate. Ask 100 people in the street who Intel are and I bet 80+ would know. Ask them who AMD is and I bet it would be fewer than 3.

    Intel doesnt have to do anything even if Ryzen is better or competitive. They may lose a little to the minute enthusiast market but thats less then their coffee machine bill. The stores will still be selling 90 Intel based machines and 2 AMD based ones tucked at the back.
     
    d50man, Silentbob343, Peter2k and 5 others like this.
  8. TheHig

    TheHig n00bie

    Messages:
    62
    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2016
    Ryzen likely won't take the performance crown in every bench. However it's looking like AMD will be relevant again and in the midrange, gaming sweet spot should crush. We have all seen that Sandy is still good enough for gaming and the masses building gaming rigs will be looking hard at 4c4t and 4c8t Ryzen. They will be good enough and if priced well steal the bang for buck compared to i5/i7 SL or KL.

    Hardcore enthusiasts will go 500+ on a cpu sure but volume is less there. Professionals will likely still look to Intel's HEDT offerings like always where minutes on jobs count and for the platform yadda yadda.
     
  9. TheHig

    TheHig n00bie

    Messages:
    62
    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2016
    Sad but true... Intel's stranglehold on the OEMs..will it ever end?
     
    daglesj likes this.
  10. cageymaru

    cageymaru [H]ard|News Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,140
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Wonder if AMD still has that 32 core chip for servers? And also a professional could buy 4 AMD 1700 series 8 cores at $350 each for less than a single $1,700 Intel 20 core. I wonder if the rumor that the AMD chips use less power at stock speeds is true also?
     
  11. ManofGod

    ManofGod [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,863
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    Yes, today but, mindshare is won over time, you seem to be stuck on now. Also, from what I remember, enthusiast were supposed to be the ones spreading the word just because it was good, not because they must.
     
  12. CentroX

    CentroX n00bie

    Messages:
    56
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2017
    King at being scammers? Besides, ryzens single thread performance is close enough this time.

    1100 dollars for a 6900k lol.
     
    Reality likes this.
  13. Pusher of Buttons

    Pusher of Buttons Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    173
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Intel has good buzz in the public for people shopping for mid-high level PCs....but at the low end, those folks don't really give a crap. They have heard of Intel but they don't know what they do other than "something with computers". This would be akin to my knowledge of diesel engines. I've heard of Cummins. If I was randomly in the market for a cheap diesel truck, would my passing familiarity with Cummins diesel be the reason I spend more? Doubtful.
     
    pendragon1 likes this.
  14. Creig

    Creig Gawd

    Messages:
    639
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Ryzen success or failure will all come down to pricing.
     
  15. jardows

    jardows Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    359
    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2015
    Intel won't drop their prices. They never have in the face of competition, and I don't think they will do that now. Better hope that Intel's response is a new product that puts Haswell performance to shame.
     
  16. daglesj

    daglesj 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,888
    Joined:
    May 7, 2005
    Thing is the stores will have 25 cheap budget Intel boxes and maybe 1 AMD one tucked under the shelf with a dog-eared 'Manager special' label on it.

    I sometimes get asked, "is this AMD any good? I've never heard of them!"
     
    Pusher of Buttons likes this.
  17. MrCaffeineX

    MrCaffeineX [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,392
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    How different are the numbers between the older version(s) of the CPU-z Benchmark and the version they tested on the Chinese site? Looking through the results from this thread: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/share-your-cpuz-benchmarks.216765/ , if the numbers are comparable, then the Ryzen chip is doing a little better than the Haswell/Haswell-E results they shared in the single-threaded and multi-threaded benchmarks.
     
  18. lollerwaffle

    lollerwaffle Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    335
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    My 7700K @4.8 gets 2404 in that single core bench and 10367 on multicore.

    1888 is 78% of that single core performance 12544 is 121% of the multi-core performance. Against a topped out 7700k (yes I'll call 4.8 topped out, sue me ;) ) I'll call that result very good.
    Well done AMD!
     
  19. Dahkoht

    Dahkoht Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    257
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Here's what I am missing. For gaming specifically , there are very few now , and in the pipeline , that having more than 4 threads makes a difference. So the top Intel 7700k , OC'd to 5ghz , is bought for 315 or so ( what I got mine for).

    If you are adding a 1080 , SSD , nice case etc etc - why would you even consider trying to save 30 bucks or whatever for something "almost as fast" for gaming ? I mean unless you can ft the ryzen for 50 bucks or something where's this massive cost saving comic in on a high end gaming system ?
     
  20. mICKEL

    mICKEL Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    255
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Odd the screens have different language, font and theme set? Perhaps even clocks. The only thing that suggests it is the same machine is that it's 12 threads. 2529/10914 for my 7700k maxed out on air.
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2017
  21. BlueFireIce

    BlueFireIce [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,437
    Joined:
    May 29, 2008
    Scammers? Intel is totally open about performance, costs and features, you know EXACTLY what you are getting when you buy an Intel chip, how exactly is that scamming? Take your fanboyism and sit back down please.
     
  22. collegeboy69us

    collegeboy69us [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,759
    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2003
    Just for fun I ran a quick CPUZ bench of my I5 6600k @ 4.5 -- going off their numbers for their hex core screen shot

    I'm 20% faster in single core performance
    I'm 30% slower in multicore - despite having 33% fewer cores.

    *shrugs* nothing that's blowing my skirt up here. If you building your first system ever, looks like AMD is the way to go if you want to save some money and still have something decent. Unless you are just a die hard AMD fan, if you already have any i5 series chip there's really no incentive to upgrade or swap over.

    It's good to have options though - but the pricing is nothing special either. you can get a 6600k for 239 from the egg. the 1600x is supposedly coming out at 259?

    The only reason I'll still keep an eye on Ryzen is if it happens to be some superb overclocker and goes to the moon for very little money. Other than that it's nothing really that special.
     
  23. cageymaru

    cageymaru [H]ard|News Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,140
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Lots of users on these forums want 8 core systems and have spent $1,000 on the 8 core Intel. There are games like the new Doom that utilizes all of your cores. Even the new Call of Duty game will use 8 cores easily. Ashes of the Singularity developer Stardock wants to license their engine out for future multithreaded RTS games. There are a bunch more games that can utilize more than 4 cores.

    A lot of games are ports of PS4 and XBOX One games. Those systems thrive off more cores, thus we should see more titles in the future that can use more than 4 cores. Plus Windows 10 can allocate power across more cores really well. Then take into account the people that really need more cores for Blender video editing of gaming footage to make a montage to upload to Youtube, Twitch streamers that want more cores to render video on the fly at a higher quality than a video card can, GIMP / Photoshop editing, etc and there is definitely a mark for these chips.

    People buy 6 & 8 core Intel chips and nobody questions their purchase? Should we start telling them that their $1,000 purchase is inferior to a 4 core Intel?

    :)
     
    Ebernanut, Peter2k, TurboGLH and 9 others like this.
  24. dgingeri

    dgingeri [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,866
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Andy735, {NG}Fidel and ManofGod like this.
  25. vegeta535

    vegeta535 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    322
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2013
    The thing is Ryzen might be good now but what does AMD have for the future? Intel could easily crush Ryzen now with dropping their 8 core processor to match AMD 8 core price if they wanted. What would AMD have to counter it? Drop their price and fall back into nothing again like with Bulldozer? As much as I want AMD to succeed they still behind Intel in everything. Sure Intel would lose a lot of profit short term but long term they would make a killing if they completely knock AMD out of business. It would be decades before any there competitor would come forth and challenge Intel if ever.
     
    Dahkoht likes this.
  26. Napoleon

    Napoleon Gawd

    Messages:
    583
    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    If you build it, they will come. We've had multi core for years and software is finally catching on. I anticipate 2-3 years from now software will use multi core/thread much more efficiently. Let's see if my X58 Xeon setup can get a little boost in life :)
     
  27. collegeboy69us

    collegeboy69us [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,759
    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2003
    In the free market world when you are the single source of *the* best possible hardware you can buy, you can charge whatever you want. That's normal and accepted practice. You think Ferrari or Lamborghini charges so much because it's "just the same 4 wheels and engine as a Chevrolet" Build a better car than Ferrari and sell it for $30k and the world will be yours.


    If you invented the best widget and were the only one in the world who could produce it, you had millions of people lined up trying to give you billions of dollars... would you sell it for $10.99 and call it a day?
     
  28. Dahkoht

    Dahkoht Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    257
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    And that's a niche of a niche. It's only recently that the vast majority of gaming machines were recommended to go with i7 instead of i5 as the extra threads are regarded as useless.

    I'm not knocking anyone for buying anything , I'm just saying next month once these are all released , for the vast majority of gamers who just , well , game , and aren't trying to compile a DVD at the same time while also running Prime , why wouldn't someone still buy what is most likely going to be the fastest gaming CPU for games that are out now and for the near future ?

    Point blank , what is AMD about to release that will beat he 7700k at 5ghz in For Honor , Conan Exiles , Dishonored 2 , or upcoming ones like Camelot Unchained and so on.

    I'm going to build a secondary AMD machine to replace my work/download/test/vm machine myself just to see how it is , haven't had an AMD machine for years since the last AthonXP and would enjoy seeing it again. My gaming rig is a 7700k at 5ghz with more room it seems , with a Titan XP , and I'd gladly replace it if AMD is going to give me an option to build something faster for 4 for most games. Will they ?

    My point is it seems to be a lot of gloss over the fact that nothing points to AMD taking over the performance crown when it comes to gaming right now , and to me it just seems they are accepting the fact that Nvidia and Intel will always have the top part for that on both video and CPU side and being the "bargain almost as fast" company just isn't all that exciting to me.
     
  29. ManofGod

    ManofGod [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,863
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    What was once was is not what will be.
     
  30. mesyn191

    mesyn191 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,271
    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    They said it was hanging around 3.5Ghz for the Ryzen chip which is supposed to have a 3.3Ghz clock that can ramp to 3.7Ghz. The Intel chip they compared it to has a 3.8Ghz clock that can ramp to 4.2Ghz. So I think "skewed heavily" is something that can be ruled out with these benches.

    Its a fairly crap synthetic benchmark but so far those single and multi threaded benchmarks are actually fairly respectable. Against a Kaby Lake chip too!
     
    ManofGod likes this.
  31. myaccountbroke

    myaccountbroke n00bie

    Messages:
    24
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2016
    x5660 @ 4.4 (6-core)
    Single 1477
    Multi 9090

    7700k @ 4.8 (4-core)
    Single 2412
    Multi 10531
     
  32. pgaster

    pgaster [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,098
    Joined:
    May 17, 2008
    Where go you get $30 or $50?
    A 7700K at Newegg right now is $349. Congrats on the deal you got, but it's not typical.
    The 6 core which this thread is about is going to be $259 if the leaks are right.
    So, more threads, $90 cheaper, and just slightly less IPC. How is this a fail?

    Also note that this single thread number seems to be at stock speed, not overclocked. IPC seems to be around Haswell levels. Remember how the guys here just did an article a month or so ago comparing a 2600K to a 7700K in gaming and it was about a 20% difference in fps? This 6 core Ryzen seems to have higher IPC than that 2600k, so instead of 20% maybe it will be 10% or less. Is that 10% worth $90? Is the lack of multi threaded power at a higher price worth it?
     
    Snowdog likes this.
  33. Zion Halcyon

    Zion Halcyon [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,724
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    All these arguments were the same one's going around when AMD first dropped the Athlon, and Intel engaged in anti-competitive practices to prevent it from taking off. The Athlon took off anyway.

    There are far more eyes now on Intel and AMD is now too large a player for Intel to try to pull that stunt again - AMD wasn't known then and it is now.

    Not saying they won't try, but they won't be able to go in as hard as they did then and get away without legal repercussion.


    Really, these sort of things read like Intel fanboi freakouts when history already has shown us how intel reacts - we have the first Athlon as a blueprint.
     
    ManofGod likes this.
  34. mesyn191

    mesyn191 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,271
    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    We already know what they're response is though. They're releasing some mildly higher clocked Kaby Lakes and not cranking out more 6800's and 6950's. They probably can't just crank those high core chips out anyways even if they wanted since they'd need to have idle fab space to do so.

    Realistically if the new mildly higher clocked Kaby Lakes don't blunt Ryzen sales I'd expect to see them drop prices a bit on some of their higher end chips but nothing too drastic.

    The big changes to the market will be with relatively recent but used Intel hardware which has been surprisingly expensive for a long time now. Cheap used 5000 and 6000 series chips and mobos could become plentiful. We'll have to wait and see.
     
  35. zkostik

    zkostik Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    361
    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Totally agreed, Intel needs some competition or we'll keep getting owned by their pricing. Which has been creeping up with each cpu generation for a while no due to absence of competition. Whether you are a fan of AMD or not, have them stay around and fight is a very good thing for consumers.

    Regarding the bench, seems like some decent numbers. Now we need to see the price and TDP of that thing. It's good to see AMD step up their game though after having too many fails. I'm sure it's very tough to compete with Intel given their size and almost unlimited R&D budge though.
     
  36. pgaster

    pgaster [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,098
    Joined:
    May 17, 2008
    ManofGod likes this.
  37. mesyn191

    mesyn191 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,271
    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    You're comparing overclocked numbers to stock numbers so of course you won't be impressed. A ~4.5Ghz Ryzen is what you should be comparing your CPU to but we don't have those numbers yet for this bench or really any others that I'm aware of.

    Just wait a couple of weeks for launch. If we do see Ryzen to have performance on par with Haswell per clock I think you'll be surprised how close it can get to your CPU at the same clock since Sky Lake wasn't all that much faster at all per clock vs Broadwell or Haswell.
     
    Makaveli@BETA and Willypants like this.
  38. vegeta535

    vegeta535 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    322
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2013
    How is it anti-competitive by dropping the price on a CPU that is better and been out for a year already? Unless Ryzen crushes everything Intel has right now it won't change anything. Judging by all the leak benchmarks out atm it won't. It's all on how Intel responds to Ryzen release. I don't see AMD being able to drag out Ryzen for 6 years like Bulldozer. It is not Intel fanboi pissing themselves. It is fact that all Intel needs to do is cut prices and Ryzen is irrelevant. With the state AMD is in now they can't win a price war with Intel.
     
  39. lollerwaffle

    lollerwaffle Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    335
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
  40. gxp500

    gxp500 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    240
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2015
    Well you are clocked just a wee bit higher than that 3.3ghz ryzen chip, it just seems that clock for clock both chips are somewhat similar but amd is doubling the cores to sweeten the deal.

    The 1600x seems to be on par with a $600 6850k in single thread performance and catching up to a 1k chip in multi threaded performance. If these things overclock well then amd has hit a grand slam.
    http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-leaked-benchmarks-analyzed-faster-intels-fastest-6-core/
     
    N4CR, Willypants and mesyn191 like this.