First AMD Ryzen 7 1700X Benchmarks Are Here

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,004
Is it time to get the confetti out yet? Probably not. While I am not a CPU expert, even I can tell that there are a lot of variables and questionable factors circling the benchmarks here. But assuming any of this is actually legit, Ryzen is, at the very least, going to be pretty decent, no?

We finally have some synthetic benchmarks of Ryzen. The CPU used in this test still carries internal codename (AMD Ryzen: ZD3406BAM88F4_38/34_Y), where F4 stands for B-steppings qualification sample. In other words, it shouldn’t be much different from a retail model. It’s worth noting that Turbo mode for Ryzen CPU is currently disabled (or undetected), so the performance could still theoretically increase. The Ryzen 7 model that was used for this test has a base clock of 3400 MHz. Judging from what we know so far, this means a Ryzen 7 1700X, so it is not the fastest Ryzen model out there.
 

Semantics

2[H]4U
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
2,817
Well NDA isn't uncommon for this kind of stuff. What i question is why we still don't have firm release dates yet, just "early march" isn't exactly what i call informing...
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Messages
16
Well NDA isn't uncommon for this kind of stuff. What i question is why we still don't have firm release dates yet.
If they do have the CPU's already, then my point still stands, why not lift the NDA and let the world see these chips? I am starting to think there is a problem. I hope I am wrong.
 

cageymaru

[H]ard as it Gets
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
19,817
If they do have the CPU's already, then my point still stands, why not lift the NDA and let the world see these chips? I am starting to think there is a problem. I hope I am wrong.
There was a rumor that the motherboard manufacturers wanted more time to perfect the XFR function. Who knows?
 

JosiahBradley

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 19, 2006
Messages
1,764
O_O So basically if I can get this to 4.5 on water it should be roughly twice as fast as my current setup. I'm all in.
 

haste.

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
1,651
So, I assume HardOCP hasn't been sent a review sample yet. Being left out? IF they leave HOCP out, then I don't trust it. No Hard, It will suck.
Kyle has been blackballed. Guess you'll have to wait for retail (unless that has changed over the past few years...)
 

sirmonkey1985

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
21,761
I don't understand what AMD is waiting for. If the CPU's are as good as they are bragging, then they should already be in the hands of reviewers.
in the case of AMD no news typically ends up being good news with them.. remember bulldozer and how hard they tried to sell it to the public? then go back and look at phenom II where they were damn near silent about it up until the NDA expired and they ended up being quite good processors, they were just a little late to the party with it.
 

dgingeri

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
2,830
I was excited, until I heard about the limited PCIe lanes in Ryzen. They're pulling the same crap as Intel's mainstream, but without the integrated GPU. They put 24 lanes on the CPU, but 4 of them are dedicated to the interconnect to the chipset, and 4 are dedicated to an NVMe drive interface, and then the chipset will only have 8 PCIe 2.0 lanes. So, at best we'll get a single GPU and one NVMe drive. Not enough lanes for RAID or 10Gbe or a second NVMe drive. Way too limited.
 

thesmokingman

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
5,711
Can blackballing lead to blueballing?
I'd rather be blue balled than black, cuz at least you got to some bases along the way... That said, I remember something about the two sides coming together recently. Looks good.

On topic, benches... is it on like donkey kong yet?
 

d50man

W[H]iskey Lover
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
2,750
$ for $ amd isn't holding a candle to intel single thread ipc or overall performance and then overclocking is going to be tragic 6800k/8700k vs x1800/x1700. SHOW US GTAV! bench apples to apples.
 

Burticus

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Messages
4,163
As others have said, yeah please don't suck, and I'll believe it when I see real reviews. If these birds are ready to fly then let's toss them into the winds and see what happens
 

scojer

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Messages
4,252
Kyle has been blackballed. Guess you'll have to wait for retail (unless that has changed over the past few years...)
They visited him a few days ago and sampled him. So we shall see.
 

Robergal

[H]Lite
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Messages
119
As others have said, yeah please don't suck, and I'll believe it when I see real reviews. If these birds are ready to fly then let's toss them into the winds and see what happens
OK First of all the Motherboard used is an AM4 320 "YOU CANNot OVERCLOCK ON THIS PER AMD". You need a AM4 350B or AM4 370. or SFF x300. The 350B is for 1 card the 370 is for 2 cards.
Please view this link-
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-uncovers-a-bit-more-on-the-x370-chipset.html
Its up to the motherboard MFG what connections they have for NVMe etc.

Basically when and where is my only question. I have loved AMD broke my heart to see them fail 5-7 years ago and had to go Intel.
 

ole-m

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 5, 2015
Messages
452
OK First of all the Motherboard used is an AM4 320 "YOU CANNot OVERCLOCK ON THIS PER AMD". You need a AM4 350B or AM4 370. or SFF x300. The 350B is for 1 card the 370 is for 2 cards.
Please view this link-
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-uncovers-a-bit-more-on-the-x370-chipset.html
Its up to the motherboard MFG what connections they have for NVMe etc.

Basically when and where is my only question. I have loved AMD broke my heart to see them fail 5-7 years ago and had to go Intel.
amd haven't been competetive since bulldozer, phenom II X6 was marvelous budget chips, nothing intel had at the time could match performance\price on the market, sure intel could sell for less but they've never been required to.
But things have kinda taken off since skylake, reduction in die size and no change in price other than adjusting it for inflation so the dollar sign is higher.
Usually we'd see a lower price on new nodes for same specs after a few months..

This is why I soooo want competition, I want nvidia AMD and intel, cause back in the days life was good - development was fast and price was fair for what you got.
Now you have an overpriced gtx1080, overpriced intel 4 core chips and people spend 33% more than what prices would be with competition
 

cjcox

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
1,466
AMD is certainly setting themselves up. Usually this ends is great enormous sad (yet funny) dissappointment. AMD, please don't be AMD? Ok?

Something tells me that this will end up just like the rest.... now if we could only see this come to market?
 

knowom

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 15, 2008
Messages
425
Here are some other benchmarks (the Ryzen CPU has the same scores as the Videocardz benchmarks):
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/summit-ridge-zen-benchmarks.2482739/page-200

Apparently, the AnandTech benchmark screenshots don't display the actual speeds of the Intel CPUs.

6900k is at 4.2GHz
5820k is at 4.8GHz
5960X is at 4.7GHz
7700K is at 5.0Ghz
Ryzen is at 3.4GHz (no turbo)



The Ryzen system is also using DDR4 2400 RAM.
So it beats the cumlord that's promising...:ROFLMAO::whistle::notworthy:
 
5

5icko

Guest
Kyle has been blackballed. Guess you'll have to wait for retail (unless that has changed over the past few years...)
Ohhhhh. Now I see why he's such an Intel fanboi. Answers everything.
 

funkydmunky

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
2,443
Intel fans will hang their hat on max game performance on their highest (O)clocked chip, while ignoring performance of Intel's $1000+ CPU's, or even what they are used for. Ryzen is about to become a true enthusiast chip, at true enthusiast prices.
PS- for the criminally slow, "enthusiast" doesn't limit itself to games and bigger and bigger monitors ;)
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,470
Intel fans will hang their hat on max game performance on their highest (O)clocked chip, while ignoring performance of Intel's $1000+ CPU's, or even what they are used for. Ryzen is about to become a true enthusiast chip, at true enthusiast prices.
PS- for the criminally slow, "enthusiast" doesn't limit itself to games and bigger and bigger monitors ;)
Honestly, I couldn't give a rats ass about Intel and their many core chips any more than I do AMD's, and I don't even game that much anymore. For overall system responsiveness I'd take 4 fast cores over 6, 8, 10 or even 16 slower ones.

There are tasks that excel on many core chips, but these are in the minority.

Personally I'll be measuring AMD's Ryzen by the max single core performance I can get out of it, with blatant disregard for it's many core performance statistics compared to Intels many core solutions.

When you strap a water cooler to it, and hit the max overclock, it better keep up with or beat my 5+ year old i7-3930k at its max watercooled clock of 4.8Ghz, or there will be no sale.

Unless you are encoding, rendering or doing certain scientific calculations, many slower cores will NEVER make up for fewer faster ones, once you pass a certain threshold core count, which is usually approximately 4.
 
Last edited:

Wierdo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 2, 2011
Messages
1,782
Last time AMD came out with a completting product (Athlon) prices dropped like a rock, went from 450mhz to 1ghz products in the span of few years, could grab a 650mhz CPU for $60 instead of 300mhz for $200 a year prior when I was in the market, I do recall. Was a golden age of performance advances and prices cuts, always something new and exciting around the corner to benchmark back then.

With this in mind I'm hoping AMD has something compelling again, we may have reached the limits of process tech, but I'm sure there's still room left for a bit more performance for less cash if competition is back.
 

funkydmunky

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
2,443
Honestly, I couldn't give a rats ass about Intel and their many core chips any more than I do AMD's, and I don't even game that much anymore. For overall system responsiveness I'd take 4 fast cores over 6, 8, 10 or even 16 slower ones.

There are tasks that excel on many core chips, but these are in the minority.

Personally I'll be measuring AMD's Ryzen by the max single core performance I can get out of it, with blatant disregard for it's many core performance statistics compared to Intels many core solutions.

When you strap my water cooler to it, and hit the max overclock, it better keep up with or beat my 5+ year old i7-3930k at its max watercooled clock of 4.8Ghz, or there will be no sale.

Unless you are encoding, rendering or doing certain scientific calculations, many slower cores will NEVER make up for fewer faster ones, once you pass a certain threshold core count, which is usually approximately 4.
Okay apparently you are my mentioned stereotypical anti-enthusiast.
For starters a 4 core anything is hardly any higher level of "system responsiveness" then any modern higher core. What are you running when a modern 4 core is "more responsive" then a 6-8-10 core? Your having a fucking laugh are you?
As far as your "Unless you are encoding, rendering, or doing....." comment goes, that is what defines an "enthusiast chip". If you want to say a gaming chip, then say so. That is a limited audience who usually buy consoles because they know the game > greater then the system.
Ryzen will be very competitive in gaming. Don't get any fantasies it will not. But it will also be very competitive with Intel's workstation class many cores.
At a enthusiast price!
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,470
Okay apparently you are my mentioned stereotypical anti-enthusiast.
For starters a 4 core anything is hardly any higher level of "system responsiveness" then any modern higher core. What are you running when a modern 4 core is "more responsive" then a 6-8-10 core? Your having a fucking laugh are you?
As far as your "Unless you are encoding, rendering, or doing....." comment goes, that is what defines an "enthusiast chip". If you want to say a gaming chip, then say so. That is a limited audience who usually buy consoles because they know the game > greater then the system.
Ryzen will be very competitive in gaming. Don't get any fantasies it will not. But it will also be very competitive with Intel's workstation class many cores.
At a enthusiast price!
Got it. Enthusiasm = Rendering/Encoding.

Single threaded performance, despite it's overwhelming importance in most applications = Not Enthusiasm.

What color is the sky on your planet?
 

funkydmunky

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
2,443
Overwhelming importance? What year is this?
The year where your 4 core is so much more responsive then an 8 core! Hehe. What colour is the sky on your planet non-enthusiast?
 

gigatexal

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jun 22, 2004
Messages
7,295
i just want it to be competitive so we get prices to come down -- when this thing release anyway? i'm itching to do a new build
 

thesmokingman

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
5,711
Got it. Enthusiasm = Rendering/Encoding.

Single threaded performance, despite it's overwhelming importance in most applications = Not Enthusiasm.

What color is the sky on your planet?
You gotta get over how important personal opinions are man.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,470
Overwhelming importance? What year is this?
The year where your 4 core is so much more responsive then an 8 core! Hehe. What colour is the sky on your planet non-enthusiast?

I don't have a quad core. I'll happily take more cores, as long as it doesn't mean sacrificing max single core performance at max overclock on water.

With my hexacore 3930k@4.8 I got the most cores available in a consumer chip at the time, and also just about the best max overclock possible at the time.

I won't sacrifice single core performance for anything.
 
Top