New Ryzen Benchmarks?

Discussion in 'AMD Processors' started by Nirad9er, Jun 6, 2017.

  1. Shintai

    Shintai 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    4,039
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2016
    I am sure you compress files all day and encode movies with no end.

    So yes, if that's what everyone does, then sure. Else it will be gaming for 100s of millions.
     
    juanrga and EuphoricRage470 like this.
  2. JustReason

    JustReason [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,779
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2015
    Judging by the time a great deal of you spend on here, you wasted your money, you shoulda bought a Celeron.
     
    noko, Kato1144, griff30 and 4 others like this.
  3. juanrga

    juanrga Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    438
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Guy A: What is the best CPU for gaming?

    Guy B: You DON'T want play games, do you? Get RyZen because it is the best choice for workstation tasks.

    If sales of RyZen were so good as some try to make us believe, forums wouldn't be filled by people trying to convince others about how RyZen is a better choice for their REAL needs: compressing and encoding all day.

    Now seriously. RyZen is not a wise choice for the needs of the OP. The OP would wait to SKL-X launch and probably CFL launch, check gaming reviews for 6C/8C models and then take a decision about if upgrade or not from his current system.
     
    Shintai likes this.
  4. Pieter3dnow

    Pieter3dnow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,728
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    Why do you say this , the person in the 1st post said this:

    This is what was said not what you are typing above.

    Juanrga stop making stuff up. All of us can read all of us know who you are ...
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2017
  5. buttons

    buttons [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,724
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    I can tell you from my experience the agesa update was very minor, maybe 3% I was one of the lucky ones that could run my memory at rated speed and latency out of the gate though. I use CS:source 720p as a benchmark. i went from 334fps to 350fps. the big boost in benchmark speeds ive seen came from software patches for the specific game.
     
  6. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,730
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    There is GOBS of software out there that the "quote unquote" "Average user" purchases for all sorts of things i.e. Video editing, photowork, scientific stuff, etc.. They literally know NOTHING about computers past the point of going to work and doing what they need to do to maintain their job and deliver a product. Their IT folks are the ones that are going to look at these CPUs and make decisions on the best dollar to performance for the company and to enhance employee productivity as much as possible. There are tons of IT people on these forums that will tell you ... the VAST amount of computing users actually use a shit load more CPU than you want to believe there Mr. HyperIntel Saddle Rider.
     
    JustReason likes this.
  7. Shintai

    Shintai 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    4,039
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2016
    And they care about TCO as well. So yes, its always fun when someone champion the 0.1% crowd as the regular user when having little to no idea what the daily workload is for the masses.

    If you really have these needs and its of value to you, well you end up with something else than Ryzen ;)
     
  8. JustReason

    JustReason [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,779
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2015
    BS and more BS. Given the avg user/buyer, they will look at two equally priced CPUs and then wager the differences. If one of them has adequately more cores then it will likely win out. And in the case of gaming being rather equal in real World usage as evidenced by https://hardforum.com/threads/the-definitive-amd-ryzen-7-real-world-gaming-guide-h.1935665/ (which I noticed not one of you link as proof for any of your arguments, maybe because it is in direct contradiction to the point you wish to convey) the decision will come down to other aspects of the platform. And just in case you think the extra cores will not influence a buyers decision, then remember Nvidia and the 970 4Gb fiasco: 3.5 against 4GB would have definitely influenced sales in a negative way therefore we now have the situation we have. And gauging the response across the internet it is true that the situation we now have is Equal options for choice, not the greatly slanted choices of before. Add in the HEDT platform and the choices are more heavily skewed in AMDs favor having their full line with access to all features of the chipset.

    But lets move from your beloved 7700k and look at the R5 1600. I am purchasing this for my wife to replace her 7870k tomorrow. In its price range there is no competition and even against the 7700k, it produces equal real world results at a far less cost. Given the price and higher core count AMD has a price to performance winner. And every penny saved on one component allows for better performing parts on another. Given most consumers have economical purchasing limits they tend to alter purchases to fit within a certain envelope and if the CPU purchase allows a greater GPU purchase then...
     
    noko likes this.
  9. DuronBurgerMan

    DuronBurgerMan Gawd

    Messages:
    563
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2017
    Why is it that every time I go into one of these threads, I see the same people, saying the same thing, posting the same graphs? My dudes, this shit has been done to death.

    Now, as to the OP's question, maybe I can help. I'll be applying the Agesa 1006 update this evening, and will run few benchmarks after I get it configured properly. Note that Toms Hardware's Skylake-X review contains a few interesting tidbits about Ryzen:

    "Most recently, Ryzen faced some puzzling performance issues at launch. More than three months later, a steady stream of firmware, chipset, and software updates has rectified a lot of the issues we initially identified. Even in this story, revisiting Ryzen 7 1800X leaves us with a very positive impression, particularly compared to Intel's $1000+ alternatives. Ryzen didn't magically become the fastest CPU out there, but it's impossible to ignore at its price point."

    Inline with the benchmarks, several times Toms expresses that Ryzen has matured considerably since launch, posting much higher scores than initial launch.

    So Ryzen has improved as BIOS updates, Agesa 1006, and some quick optimizations have hit the market. Intel, meanwhile, is having similar teething problems with Skylake-X right now. It appears new, highly parallel CPUs are not the easiest thing to launch. Anyway, Skylake-X has better IPC and clock speeds, so per core it will be both faster and more expensive. If gaming on a Haswell or newer, I wouldn't even bother upgrading. Substantial gaming performance increases are not in the cards from CPU alone. Now, if productivity is in the mix... different story altogether. I'd probably buy a 7820X if I were still looking. Nice price/performance sweet spot. Ryzen remains a good option for folks who want multi core on a budget. Threadripper may deliver an upset if priced right, though. So maybe it's worth it to wait and see.