How do you expect anyone to answer that question? Outside of it's pending launch soon, Ryzen is an unknown at this point. We don't have prices. We don't have performance data. Your question might as well verbatim read, "Chevy is making a new car, will you buy it?"
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
are you going to abandon intel for ryzen?
- Thread starter AndreRio
- Start date
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 32,269
If it kicks Intel's ass by offering better performance/value ratio, then sure.
blackstang281
n00b
- Joined
- May 5, 2012
- Messages
- 9
I am super excited for Ryzen, really hoping it gets Intel and AMD competing at the high end again. A Slot A athlon 700 was my *FIRST* cpu/motherboard I bought myself when I was like 13. Ran AMD cpus all the way to the Athlon 64s. I am excited about the prospect of a real CPU price war. Also really anticipating Vega
I have an overclocked i7-6700k with a GTX1070 in my gaming machine. I also have a FX9590/Crosshair V Forumula-Z/R9 Fury in my "workstation/2nd gaming pc." I am guessing I will keep the i7 for gaming, as I am guessing an OC'd skylake will still be faster for current games, especially since I play Starcraft 2 more often than all my other games combined.
So my workstation will most likely get upgraded to an 8c/16t ryzen part. Both machines are watercooled, so I will be pushing Ryzen to see what it can do
I have an overclocked i7-6700k with a GTX1070 in my gaming machine. I also have a FX9590/Crosshair V Forumula-Z/R9 Fury in my "workstation/2nd gaming pc." I am guessing I will keep the i7 for gaming, as I am guessing an OC'd skylake will still be faster for current games, especially since I play Starcraft 2 more often than all my other games combined.
So my workstation will most likely get upgraded to an 8c/16t ryzen part. Both machines are watercooled, so I will be pushing Ryzen to see what it can do
Saying you can't tell the difference between unnamed 1080p games is not a valid argument. I can run Duke Nukem 3D at 1080p on a FX series processor and get 1000 fps then say Bulldozer is totally awesome because it runs a 20 year old game great. But an E1200 can do the same job just fine. It's like saying any two red cars are the same, nevermind one is a Ferrari and the other is a Renault.
Bulldozer was a disaster, if you have to rewrite parts of the thread scheduler to take "advantage" of the Bulldozer architecture (more like make it avoid putting two resource intensive threads on the same module to avoid severe performance degradation.) then you have a problem. I have several Bulldozer arch CPUs and they're useless for any sort of real workload since you can only effectively use half of the CPU without starting to experience performance degradation from the CMT shared resources. Heat and power consumption is another issue, why get a crippled 125W+ part when a 65-95W Intel part can do the same thing properly and not crank out the heat?
An ASUS motherboard not being reliable? Not surprising.
ManofGod
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2007
- Messages
- 13,023
Personally, I am going to take a couple of days off from work on the day of Zen's release. I am going to do the 3 hour drive down to the Northeast Ohio Microcenter and enjoy that day completely. If the prices are not too high, I am going to get an upgrade for both my computers at the same time and enjoy the build at home. (Looking forward to the excitement.)
It sounds like you know what you are doing, but you might need to bring a friend. Microcenter has that one cpu per person policy and some stores enforce that, some don't. With this being a pretty big new cpu launch I could see them being much more strict.
That gives me that much more appreciation for living 20 minutes away from both a MicroCenter and a Fry's Electronics store. While most of my shopping is online these days, it's nice to be able to walk into a computer superstore and just stare at the shiz like a kid. So much shiz! It won't be taken for granted again.
WhoBeDaPlaya
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2002
- Messages
- 2,656
Easy. Buy 1, go for lunch, come back for another.
Or do 1 for pickup, buy 1 in-store.
WhoBeDaPlaya
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2002
- Messages
- 2,656
You should have jumped on a cheap (~$50) X56x0 Westmere
^ This. People whine, piss and moan about the FX, but it was pretty good value for money / had a lower price of entry. All my non-gaming rigs are running 8320s and those won't need an upgrade for a brief eternity.
Last edited:
![Zarathustra[H]](/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1723407683){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 40,592
Too early to tell.
If at max overclock on water it can beat my more than 5 year old 3930k@4.8Ghz in single threaded benchmarks, I'll get one, if not, then no.
If at max overclock on water it can beat my more than 5 year old 3930k@4.8Ghz in single threaded benchmarks, I'll get one, if not, then no.
Don't worry mate, it's called PEBKAC. I won't trivialize the discussion saying "mine doesn't do that", you could simply go to Amazon or Newegg reviews and find what professionists that use Vishera processors (cause you replied to a post about Vishera) for a living say. Or go to OBS forum and read experiences of gamers that stream. Example:
https://obsproject.com/forum/threads/hows-the-fx-8350-for-obs-streaming-1080p-while-gaming.2871/
And forgive me if 100% CPU usage isn't heavy enough for you.
You should have jumped on a cheap (~$50) X56x0 Westmere
^ This. People whine, piss and moan about the FX, but it was pretty good value for money / had a lower price of entry. All my non-gaming rigs are running 8320s and those won't need an upgrade for a brief eternity.
You can say that again.
Last edited:
My prediction is I think going forward into 2018 is that Core i5 owners are going to be disappointed. HT makes a big difference, enough difference to pull your CPU ahead another year or two.
I think any Ryzen and Core i7 CPU will be fine and future proof and that Intel will be forced into HT for all CPU's in the 2018 and beyond (Coffee Lake).
I own a 2500k and I will probably buy the i7 7700k and OCit to whatever I can get stable with my Noctua C14S and forget about it for the next few years. Knowing how DX12 scales, Ryzen isn't going to be any better for gaming, with a few exceptions in a few isolated cases (in that next 2-3 years) and then only a little bit. i7's hyper threading and faster clock speeds already insulated me from any extra "core" gains in games. AMD Fan boys will disagree, but whatever.
Sandy Bridge is still good, but the Witcher 3 and BF1 were two of the first games that actually started to show "age" for Sandy Bridge and that chip is 6 years old and STILL runs fine.
I think getting a Core i5 is stupid though, Hyper threading IS starting to show a difference.
Look, Ryzen will be very close to Kaby Lake. We have hit engineering limits with the current silicone technologies and AMD was going to catch up at some time. Intel isn't going to pull a rabbit out of its ass in 2018 and "destroy AMD" like some people suspect.
I think from here on out, we are going to see the battle shift to Core Count and Price and profits will drop because of it.
In 3 or 4 years from now, we will probably see some radical shifts and breakthroughs, but I think anybody buying a Kaby Lake or a Ryzen, will all be fine until the next break through in 3 years or so.
I think the only people who are going to really see a difference in 2018 and beyond, are going to be Core i5 owners and then mostly in the "beyond" phase, meaning they will still be very happy.
For the most part, we are all bitching about a few dollars or % points anyways.
I think any Ryzen and Core i7 CPU will be fine and future proof and that Intel will be forced into HT for all CPU's in the 2018 and beyond (Coffee Lake).
I own a 2500k and I will probably buy the i7 7700k and OCit to whatever I can get stable with my Noctua C14S and forget about it for the next few years. Knowing how DX12 scales, Ryzen isn't going to be any better for gaming, with a few exceptions in a few isolated cases (in that next 2-3 years) and then only a little bit. i7's hyper threading and faster clock speeds already insulated me from any extra "core" gains in games. AMD Fan boys will disagree, but whatever.
Sandy Bridge is still good, but the Witcher 3 and BF1 were two of the first games that actually started to show "age" for Sandy Bridge and that chip is 6 years old and STILL runs fine.
I think getting a Core i5 is stupid though, Hyper threading IS starting to show a difference.
Look, Ryzen will be very close to Kaby Lake. We have hit engineering limits with the current silicone technologies and AMD was going to catch up at some time. Intel isn't going to pull a rabbit out of its ass in 2018 and "destroy AMD" like some people suspect.
I think from here on out, we are going to see the battle shift to Core Count and Price and profits will drop because of it.
In 3 or 4 years from now, we will probably see some radical shifts and breakthroughs, but I think anybody buying a Kaby Lake or a Ryzen, will all be fine until the next break through in 3 years or so.
I think the only people who are going to really see a difference in 2018 and beyond, are going to be Core i5 owners and then mostly in the "beyond" phase, meaning they will still be very happy.
For the most part, we are all bitching about a few dollars or % points anyways.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 40,592
Yes, you'll be able to find limited usage scenarios where the 8 cores of AMD's current FX chips will be of benefit, but for overall computing it is a complete and total fail.
A friend of mine (a software developer) is actually still running his old quad core Phenom II, because he bought an FX8350 and his compile times ROSE by 20% compared to the much lower clocked Phenom II.
I used one as a virtualization server for a while, and it wasn't a bad platform for that, but on the desktop it is really only going to be useful in for rendering/encoding type professional workloads and suck at everything else.
You get a choice between two brands. One brand performs great in a narrow slice of tasks that are well threaded, but stinks at everything else. The other brand performs everything across the board, regardless of how well threaded it is. Which one do you pick?
For me there is one number that will determine if I will buy a Ryzen chip. In Cinebench R11.5 single threaded test, can it beat a score of 1.92 at max overclock on water? If so I am interested.
If not, it is slower per core than my 5+ year old i7-3930k at its max overclock of 4.8Ghz on water, and I won't touch it.
Multithreaded tests are irrelevant when it comes to predicting CPU performance. if it performs well per core, then you KNOW that it will handle everything you can throw at it down the road. If it performs poorly per core, and only does comparatively well when you load up all of the cores, then you know that you are going to ahve mixed results in the future, well threaded apps may work well, but everything else will suck. I'm done making compromises.
I want anything I buy to work well with everything I might run, an that requires good per core performance. I don't care about IPC or Clock speed alone, just that it has high performance per core, and has at least 4 cores. Everything else is irrelevant to me.
I replied to a specific quote. I don't care about benchmarks, i do a lot of multitasking and use exactly very heavy applications (x264), like the ones that was claimed that the FX can't really handle. I am not a gamer, so i very much prefer the FX than the similarly priced i3, which, has great IPC, but load it with 8 heavy threads (like in a streaming scenario) and it will start to gasp. I want anything i buy to run every application i have fast and not worry about how many threads i run. And FX does that really well and i rarely see a maxed out core. I also enjoy a nimble desktop and 8 threads help a lot in that.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 40,592
Fair enough. So your workload is in the limited range these things are good. Good for you. As far as "I rarely see a maxed out core" comment, this has nothing to do with the CPU itself. Even if the cores were maxed out, you would almost never see them as such in the performance tab of the Task Manager, unless you were loading up all 8 cores. The Windows scheduler moves threads around between cores so fast that most of the time, even a single maxed out thread on one core, will often look like an average of 12.5% across all cores, as the schedule rapidly shifts the thread from core to core.
Chances are you are very much pinning those cores a lot more often than you think.
There is specific software that if ran at background can later inform you as per what maxed out a core. I use more utilities than the average user does, but i am not a gamer, like most of you are.
N4CR
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2011
- Messages
- 4,947
Most likely. I want to do a 4k build this year as I put it off from 2015 and 2016... Hopefully some decent 40" screens will come out as that is the main reason I want to move. Screen size, thus requiring a more grunty rig.
This current rig will be praised in all its glory and given a fantastic ceremony + elevation to a permanent wall install ahem, relegated to NAS duty in the loft, or if I'm feeling nice, it'll be a 2nd room gaming rig and NAS until I build a more power efficient NAS..
This current rig will be praised in all its glory and given a fantastic ceremony + elevation to a permanent wall install ahem, relegated to NAS duty in the loft, or if I'm feeling nice, it'll be a 2nd room gaming rig and NAS until I build a more power efficient NAS..
ellover009
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2005
- Messages
- 1,908
I have an i7 920.
I don't think I will leave Intel to go to AMD but you never know. Maybe it will come out before I do my next build and it's performance will speak for itself, not marketing, speculations, and dreams. Seeing this thread made me look more into it.
I am rooting for AMD do well because if there's good competition there's better pricing and product innovation. I sadly feel like AMD has failed to stimulate Intel for the last few years.
Last time I was excited for an upcoming AMD it was the bulldozed and that did not end up a great processor, they choked it on limited resources.
The ryzen looks interesting. But we won't know how good it is until it comes out. I honestly don't know how much it will cost since they can sell it for as much as people are willing to pay for it.
Magic question is when is it coming out and will they keep up with demand ? If I wanted one could I even procure it? Every time in the past I demonstrated interest in some AMD products it was either out of stock or the price ballooned out of control. I am talking about the 4870x2 in the past and other beast gpu solutions.
Yes, you definitely have a PEBKAC if you think that Amazon and Newegg reviews are made primarily by professionists. The majority are made by the average joe, people that don't know what they're doing or trolls. Sure there are also professionals that make reviews, but who has the time to spend hours sifting through crap to find them? If you have to read those types of reviews to make a buying decision, you haven't done your research properly.
A single use case where the 8350 does marginally better in heavily threaded tasks is not an example of all real world use cases. Your link also doesn't address the issues with CMT or power consumption that I mentioned. They even talk about the 2600k being able to do the same thing in that specific use case, which is a year older and uses 31.5% less power.
Bulldozer CPUs are awful for single threaded tasks, you can only effectively use half of the CPU before you run into performance degradation due to CMT. I run into this problem all the time with the AMD CPUs I have.
Do you even know what you're talking about? Games automatically allocate the largest CPU time slice available so you'll see 100% CPU/thread usage regardless if you're on a 486 or some 16 core Xeon. The same applies to other high demand applications like encoders.
KingGlade
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 176
I have a 3770K and was looking into getting a 6850K but will wait for actual performance reviews for the Ryzen 8-core CPU and 4-core to see. With what I've seen so far I think that I will bite the bullet and get the 8-core Ryzen especially if that rumored price is true.
Nanogrip
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2016
- Messages
- 482
I'll get a Ryzen eventually. But I am more excited to see price drops, hopefully the FX 8 cores will drop too so I can start making some cheap gaming systems for a small business that I'm trying to get started.
WhoBeDaPlaya
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2002
- Messages
- 2,656
Aren't they pretty cheap already with the MicroCenter bundle prices?
I thought it would be rather obvious, that i meant to read reviews that come from professionists. They often state that they are and what professional use they make. AFAIK there is no other way to know if someone is professional, there is no "pro" tag neither in Amazon nor in newegg, but i guess i was asking too much of a mental work. If you don't trust them, then you are free also to ignore people in this very forum. Do you want me to hold you hand? You don't want to find pro reviews, you ignore anyone in a forum which opinion you don't like, but you "know" what you think is true. OK. And then it's me who didn't make research. Whatever mate.
What you said, about "they're useless for any sort of real workload since you can only effectively use half of the CPU without starting to experience performance degradation from the CMT shared resources", is total BS and google is your friend. I will just leave this here about whether this is real workload:
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/375/AMD_FX-Series_FX-8350_vs_Intel_Core_i7_i7-3770.html
BTW, how much were they costing back then? Ah, yes...totally useless... They are useless for heavy workload, because they suffer a scale penalty in FPU heavy applications. And this makes them useless. Ok mate.
Reading comprehension problems? Or are the games the "real workload that uses half of the CPU"? Who talked about games? Read again my reply.
What you REALLY mean, or rather should say is: "Intel is much better at games, for twice or 3 times the price up until 2 years ago and FX is trash cause at 1/2 or 1/3 the money was like on par or 20% behind on heavy multithreaded jobs".
You know, professionists most commonly use heavy multithreaded applications, not games. Whenever a game is heavily multithreaded and heavy on the CPU, the FX performs admirably so many years after its release. Google for Witcher 3, Assassins Creed Unity and other heavy titles that can use all 8 cores.
EDIT: And since you now talk about games, let me illuminate you, about the fact that FX was RARELY using 100% CPU load (contrary to what you think), because games were not multithreaded enough and heavy enough.
This is a game. Famous for running badly in FX
http://imgur.com/gqELQ4a
^ If you THINK that on this game, the FX will show 100% CPU, you are OUT of your mind.
This is ANOTHER game:
http://imgur.com/8UJJijq
Spot the difference. OK, it has a severe degradation since it runs 8 heavy threads, so it's 5 entire FPS behind 4760K in min fps and 0 in average, but, hey, how much was the 4760K for?
http://imgur.com/wcBftLo
Get it now? Total trash you say? Which one of the 2 games, according to you is heavier? Trash for a gamer that doesn't care about money, maybe. Have you any idea about the price difference between Intel and AMD up to 2 years ago? Let me tell you something. Outside USA, there are other continents too, where professionists don't go to spend 500 EUR for a CPU alone, when they can get the job of an 3770 +-20% at 1/3 of a price? That's more of a spoiled gamers sport mainly in the US. The FX is GOLD for people that can run HEAVY applications on them. And by heavy, i mean loads close to 100%. IF it's still not clear to you, there is nothing more i can do. You don't even know basic stuff about FX functioning.
EDIT 2: Take also this. Since video encoding/rendering is only one thing that professionists use with heavy real world loads, i will also leave here photo editing and 3D rendering:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/4
For the record, photoshop is FPU heavy and always favoured Intel. However, as you can see, despite the "severe degradation", the 8350 is 3 seconds behind 3770. Now, maybe in USA your professionists count down seconds, in Europe they don't. I can't even drink a sip of coffee in 3 seconds.
I mean, i am sorry, that's what professionists use here for heavy, real life, multithreaded jobs. If you think this is trash, you should really search the prices of Intel-AMD up to 2 years ago and ponder on the fact that even the lowest of the FX line (the 8300 was unlocked and freely overclockable).
Maybe in USA your professionists do other heavy stuff, please free to illustrate.
Last edited:
I have no reason to upgrade my 4770k @ 4.4ghz. The only reason to upgrade is for the new features of a newer platform. Performance is more then plenty for me and honestly for most people too. Unless you a actually need the extra cores for work it's pointless. I'll probably hold on til it for a couple more years before I ponder a CPU upgrade.
OrangeKhrush
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,673
Unless you can get a CPU that at stock is a better and can still overclock.
I am in the same boat as you, I have a 4790K and a 4960X and both still do what I need but Zen is very intriguing.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 40,592
Yeah, I am still on my 2011 3930k. I feel like I'll be upgrading soon (more for features and temps than absolute performance, as this thing still rocks at 4.8Ghz) but whatever I get next - I feel - will be with me for quite a while. if I can get as many years out of it, as I got out of my 3930k, we are talking 2022
I thought we'd all be flying spaceships, and buying augs by 2022
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 40,592
It doesn't matter how good you are with security. If you are running a system with open known exploits it is only a matter of time. Hubris about "I know what I am doing unlike those idiots over there" will only hasten the problem.
This is why we can't have nice things. By doing this, you are part of whats irresponsibly ruining the internet for everyone. Just update your goddamned obsolete apps that won't run on modern platforms already. No excuses.
If it were up to me, every OS would have a built in feature that irreversibly disables the network stack the second it goes EOL.
WhoBeDaPlaya
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2002
- Messages
- 2,656
No problem, since Intel won't really have a new uArch until then anyway.
Judging from the longevity of my old i7 920 D0, I went ahead and maxed out my Z87 rig at 4770K launch.
You give Microsoft/Apple/Google that kind of power and they will EOL consumer desktops at 1 year and force you buy a new one every year.
Overall I do agree, you need to be an adult and upgrade.
Shintai
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2016
- Messages
- 5,678
If you think Windows PCs are expensive in maintenance you dont want to know about Apple.
There is no alternative unless you want to decrease productivity and increase cost.
IBM dont like Microsoft products because Microsoft have beaten the IBM dinosaur into the ground. OS/2, Notes etc.
Mac sales are pretty much in a collapse with a 15-20% YoY decline.
Last edited:
drescherjm
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 14,940
Once you add phones to the count then windows is going to loose.
Hagrid
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2006
- Messages
- 9,166
I know if the price is good I wouldn't mind trying it out for a second machine.
It seems you're in such a blind rage that you're spinning hilarious straw man fallacies. The last time I checked, Amazon and Newegg are not Hardforum.
Are you not able to comprehend words properly or something? Or is it your blind rage stopping you? I'm talking about one thing and you're going off on topics that were never part of the original discussion.
No, that's what you want to see that was never said.
You know, if you would have comprehended what I posted, you wouldn't blindly assume I was talking solely about game workloads.
Now I talk about games? Do you even remember what you posted just a page ago about games? It was in response to something you posted. And for clarification, when I said "CPU/thread" I meant a single core on a CPU or a thread. Pretty much every demanding game made for the last 20 years is going to use 100% of a CPU core/thread on said CPU.
We get it that you're a hardcore AMD fanboy who's currently in a tantrum because someone, somewhere on the internet insulted AMD. You can keep your rose tinted glasses on if it makes you feel any better.
If you want to be disrespectful, try to put words in my mouth and use inane straw man fallacies then it's not worth talking with you any longer.
What's the point of this even? I said the power usage and heat output is higher, which is correct and your source confirms it. What it doesn't talk about however (and I've yet to see someone talk about it), is the power usage of the associated heat output being removed by HVAC or window unit A/C systems. I can run 4 Intel quad systems in a 99 SQ foot room and a 5000 BTU window unit has no problems keeping it at 75F by cycling on a couple of times an hour. On the other hand, I can run ONE FX8370 and the poor window unit has to run nearly constantly to keep it at 80F.
The old Phenom II quads had the same problem with heat output. I used to hate dealing with my buddies x4 955 at my house because his rig would crank out so much heat. I eventually put him in another room, which would get ridiculously hot.