There is nothing to figure out, just a fact. It does make difference sorry and 4k gaming is not going away and with the faster video card it is going to make a major difference.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Ryzen 7 1700X Processor Blows Away Intel’s $1000 Core i7-5960X & goes toe to toe with Intel’s 6900k
- Thread starter pencea
- Start date
There is nothing to figure out, just a fact. It does make difference sorry and 4k gaming is not going away and with the faster video card it is going to make a major difference.
Good on you for getting what you want.
The fact that AMD being a much smaller company with signicantly less money, managed to catch up to the much larger Intel is a huge achievement, and just goes to show Intel has been sitting on their laurels for far too long.
After 10 years? Give me a break. Don't get me wrong i am glad AMD is giving Intel a headache because it will force Intel to lower the price of really over priced CPUs. Ryzen is really really good for competition and more of you buy Ryzen better for me as Intel is going to do something about it, release better product or cut the price down big time
My whole point is that people make Ryzen look like it performs significantly faster than Intel counterpart which is not the case...just don't like a hype based on bullshit.
Also entire TDP thing is sort of bullshit too. Intel chip is more complex than AMD's as it carries more moving parts in it...more PCIe, quad channel memory support...it adds to it. Intel TDP is not bad at all because that packaging carries 22/44 Xeon core running at pretty high speed with boost clock of 3.6Ghz and yet maintaining same TDP.
I want to see 22/44 core Ryzen and its TDP * * * cough
4k gaming will be done with 1 card sooner or later. Judging by your posts about you are here to troll or justify your expensive intel purchase. AMD has a winner product and I sold my X99 platform so I can play with something other than Intel for once.
You compare a 4.2ghz and 5ghz 7700k overclock in a limited threaded game to a Stock 3ghz - 3.7ghz boost Ryzen and call it a fail. You clearly need to analyse and understand the articles before you spat off misinformation that just starts a flame war, seriously.
Clock for clock would be the correct comparison, not what you showed.
Also, what moving parts does intel's CPU have, list those specifics since you know what you are talking about?
Clock to clock comparison is no real because 7700k is 4/8 setup and Ryzen is 8/16 setup so what you are saying is bullshit. Intel cpu has 40PCIe and quad memory channel by the way Ryzen does not bring any new instructions compared to Intel counterpart. There is really nothing new with Ryzen CPU...not to mention that AMD V is not really supported well.
Glad you got it figured out, why don't you go post in the intel thread since you are an expert here. Please just GTFO.
My purchase for $150 for x99 motherboard and $350 for Xeon 10/20 cheaper than what you will pay for Ryzen therefore i am not justifying anything here.
Yes it will but then you will have 5k and 8k gaming and more demanding games.
pencea
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2016
- Messages
- 74
After 10 years? Give me a break. Don't get me wrong i am glad AMD is giving Intel a headache because it will force Intel to lower the price of really over priced CPUs. Ryzen is really really good for competition and more of you buy Ryzen better for me as Intel is going to do something about it, release better product or cut the price down big time
My whole point is that people make Ryzen look like it performs significantly faster than Intel counterpart which is not the case...just don't like a hype based on bullshit.
Also entire TDP thing is sort of bullshit too. Intel chip is more complex than AMD's as it carries more moving parts in it...more PCIe, quad channel memory support...it adds to it. Intel TDP is not bad at all because that packaging carries 22/44 Xeon core running at pretty high speed with boost clock of 3.6Ghz and yet maintaining same TDP.
I want to see 22/44 core Ryzen and its TDP * * * cough
You really need to read more clearly. People are not saying it performs significantly "faster". What they're saying is it performs "Competitive" there's a difference. You can spin it around all you want, Ryzen's multi threaded performance is very competitive to Intel's 6900K which the 7700K can never match. Again this is multi threading we're talking about.
There are people out there who does more than just game on their PC. Stop ignoring this fact.
I am not gonna GTFO because what i said is true. Intel 2011-v3 provides 40 PCIE ...fact. Intel 2011-v3 does provide quad memory channel which AMD in their demos forced to dual channel for whatever f. reason. Intel TDP is not bad but consistent as it can pack 22/44 core Xeon boosting to 3.6Ghz. I want to see Ryzen in that setup and its TDP. As far as instructions goes Ryzen does not bring any new instructions compared to Intel, in fact lacks some. And also AMD V is not supported as good as Intel vt which is a big thing in virtualization.
Now you GTFO.
Yes. Like virtualization where AMD v sucks at.
pencea
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2016
- Messages
- 74
Master_shake_
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 17,794
nevermind that the price of a ryzen cpu is a FRACTION of what intel charges.
so we have learned what from this? it's ok if its almost as fast as long as it's cheaper by a lot?
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2004
- Messages
- 25,307
Rule #1 folks....
(1) Absolutely NO FLAMING, NAME CALLING OR PERSONAL ATTACKS, NO TROLLING. Mutual respect and civilized conversation is the required norm.
(1) Absolutely NO FLAMING, NAME CALLING OR PERSONAL ATTACKS, NO TROLLING. Mutual respect and civilized conversation is the required norm.
nice to see AMD be competitive again
the PCIe lanes is a non issue for the vast majority of people out there, even here. ive learned my lessons with multigpu setups and cant be bothered anymore, spend the money on the 1080/1070 and avoid the dual card approach IMO.
I know i dont play benchmarks all day so if the real world stuff is on par with intel thats all most care about when it comes to bang for buck, my 6800k isnt even overclocked anymore since i could only tell in benchmarks and my hydro bill.
the PCIe lanes is a non issue for the vast majority of people out there, even here. ive learned my lessons with multigpu setups and cant be bothered anymore, spend the money on the 1080/1070 and avoid the dual card approach IMO.
I know i dont play benchmarks all day so if the real world stuff is on par with intel thats all most care about when it comes to bang for buck, my 6800k isnt even overclocked anymore since i could only tell in benchmarks and my hydro bill.
Dreamerbydesign
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2008
- Messages
- 6,206
Live demos in very specific circumstances. They lost my trust 10 years ago with their terrible marketing and integrity.
When independent benches come out I'll make decisions.
I have not seen a butt hurt Intel Fan Boy in a long time. Haha.
I only own Intel and I have X99 and I am excited for Ryzen. Keep pretending 95w TDP - 8 Core/16 Thread - 499 is nothing special. You see the first crop of mobos and freak out, come on.
I only own Intel and I have X99 and I am excited for Ryzen. Keep pretending 95w TDP - 8 Core/16 Thread - 499 is nothing special. You see the first crop of mobos and freak out, come on.
Dreamerbydesign
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2008
- Messages
- 6,206
There's absolutely nothing wrong with NOT jumping on the bandwagon and waiting for third party reviews. Actually that used to be the standard practice before all this pre order bullshit happened.
I'm excited also, and also waiting for solid reviews.
Also, I did not build a 6700k system last year based on numbers from Intel. I based it on real actual independent third party reviews.
He's addressing Luka
If you refer to me i am not Intel Fab Boy. I owned AMD in the past, Nvidia, Intel and what not. 8/16 at 499 with questionable 95W TDP is actually nothing special. A price itself is but a product is not. I already paid for same performance, yes for nifty price but unshelling $500 for same thing is just stupid. And this is for someone who already invested in Intel platform. For someone who wants to update really old rig, yes i do recommend AMD Ryzen. Now 95W TDP is questionable because Ryzen is not that good overclocker and intel counter part is for sure 135-140 W but you have to remember that Intel squeezed 22/44 Xeon under same TDP boosting at 3.6Ghz. I believe that AMD and Intel approach in calculating TDP is quite different.
If AMD releases 22/44 Ryzen under same 95W specs kudos to them....i don't think so. You also have to remember that Intel cpu has quad memory channel vs. 2 and has 40 PCIe lines coming from CPU vs 24 which adds to overall TDP.
Master_shake_
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 17,794
why isn't ryzen a good overclocker?
From what i saw in soon released official benchmarks you are looking at no more than what AMD offers for overclock.
Master_shake_
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 17,794
i mean 5.2 on all cores is overclocking no?
LN2 sure but it's still over stock no?
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-world-record/
pencea
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2016
- Messages
- 74
AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Overclocked To 4GHz On All 8 Cores – Provides 1800X+ Performance With Decent Motherboards & Cooling
OCUK staffer “Gibbo” reports successfully overclocking a retail Ryzen 7 1700 processor with an ASUS Crosshair VI Hero motherboard to 4.05GHz on all 8 cores. With this overclock the CPU would effectively be running 450MHz higher than the Ryzen 7 1800X flagship. “Gibbo” estimates, based on his results, that the 1800X should be able to hit 4.3GHz on all 8 cores.
The overclock was achieved using a 240mm Asetek built liquid cooler, which is similar to the Corsair H100i.
At 4.05GHz on all 8-cores an overclocked Ryzen 7 1700 effectively outperforms every other desktop 8-core CPU on the market. Including Intel’s $1000+ Haswell-E and Broadwell-E i7 5960X and i7 6900K.
When running at 4.05GHz on all 8-cores, the Ryzen 7 1700 effectively outperforms every other desktop 8-core CPU on the market. Including both Intel’s Haswell-E and Broadwell-E i7 5960X and i7 6900K.
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-overclocked-4ghz/
OCUK staffer “Gibbo” reports successfully overclocking a retail Ryzen 7 1700 processor with an ASUS Crosshair VI Hero motherboard to 4.05GHz on all 8 cores. With this overclock the CPU would effectively be running 450MHz higher than the Ryzen 7 1800X flagship. “Gibbo” estimates, based on his results, that the 1800X should be able to hit 4.3GHz on all 8 cores.
The overclock was achieved using a 240mm Asetek built liquid cooler, which is similar to the Corsair H100i.
At 4.05GHz on all 8-cores an overclocked Ryzen 7 1700 effectively outperforms every other desktop 8-core CPU on the market. Including Intel’s $1000+ Haswell-E and Broadwell-E i7 5960X and i7 6900K.
When running at 4.05GHz on all 8-cores, the Ryzen 7 1700 effectively outperforms every other desktop 8-core CPU on the market. Including both Intel’s Haswell-E and Broadwell-E i7 5960X and i7 6900K.
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-overclocked-4ghz/
IdiotInCharge
NVIDIA SHILL
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14,675
Comparing OC'd Ryzen to stock Intel CPUs that have been run at 4.5GHz themselves is disingenuous. It's still nice to see, but AMD should have seriously released these CPUs at these speeds. As it stands, it's still slower than a stock 7700k in gaming (well, at least the 98-99% that cannot make positive use of >4 cores).
lolfail9001
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 31, 2016
- Messages
- 1,496
Amount of wccftech links is outta control.
Kind of ironic considering that quality of journalism there dropped even harder.
Kind of ironic considering that quality of journalism there dropped even harder.
So you think the Ryzen CPU will be faster than your 5930K? I ask because I have the same cpu and i'm on the fence about getting a 1700X.
Not sure if this is meant to be in the context of the Ryzen event and Cinebench/couple of game results or more generally 'leaks' on the internet.
If you mean the event and Cinebench, Ryzen was not overclocked and in fact they gave Intel a pretty nice setup, including ensuring that the motherboard was boosting a single core to 4GHz on th 6900K and was using max boost of 3.7GHz, while the 6800K also was correct with normal and single core boost.
Now of course one has to allow for throttling and that is my only downside of the test as it uses the default cooler option for both AMD and Intel but that is how they were sold.
And neither will be the ideal cooler tbh, albeit it is quite possible the Wraith is better than the BXTS13A, so maybe some slight throttling ( a bit more on the Intel side I would assume than AMD but this still shows Ryzen is still a better performer even allowing for it), and outside of the full-on multithread the throttling would not be an issue for the single threaded score.
Also the Cinebench mult-threaded score seems to align with Tom's score and they used a water cooler for their Broadwell-E rated to 500W.
Worth noting there will be variance between other site cinebench scores as they have their own Broadwell-E cpus (some variation) and own systems (again provides some variation); Anandtech managed a higher multithreaded score in Cinebench but their single threaded score was lower, as I mentioned Tom's results align closer to AMD event.
Linked this in other threads but here are the system configs of the event:
At Anandtech has all the event slides.
http://images.anandtech.com/galleries/5485/AMD Ryzen Tech Day - Lisa Su Keynote-33.jpg?_ga=1.37728422.743409668.1486127831
Cheers
IdiotInCharge
NVIDIA SHILL
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14,675
It was meant in the context quoted.
Ah the un-official testing so far.
Still the official event gives us a pretty clear indicator, but yeah I get your context and point.
The overclock should only be used as an individual indicator of Ryzen behaviour and not compared to competitor unless that is also referenced in OC behaviour/performance - agree with you there.
I missed the context because Overclockers UK did not compare it to Intel just what Ryzen could do purely in terms of clock behaviour, seems the poster is adding a further context to what Overclockers did.
But his context may had been the LN2 Cinebench world record result where it is all out overclocking and Ryzen has just beaten Haswell-E *shrug*.
And yeah that is not indicative of anything but extreme LN2 benchmarking.
Cheers
I think it will be a bit faster but its pointless to ask me.
I am waiting on official reviews and a motherboard in my form factor.
After 10 years? Give me a break. Don't get me wrong i am glad AMD is giving Intel a headache because it will force Intel to lower the price of really over priced CPUs. Ryzen is really really good for competition and more of you buy Ryzen better for me as Intel is going to do something about it, release better product or cut the price down big time
My whole point is that people make Ryzen look like it performs significantly faster than Intel counterpart which is not the case...just don't like a hype based on bullshit.
Also entire TDP thing is sort of bullshit too. Intel chip is more complex than AMD's as it carries more moving parts in it...more PCIe, quad channel memory support...it adds to it. Intel TDP is not bad at all because that packaging carries 22/44 Xeon core running at pretty high speed with boost clock of 3.6Ghz and yet maintaining same TDP.
I want to see 22/44 core Ryzen and its TDP * * * cough
If info is accurate:
150W for SP4 (up to 16 core)
180W for SP3 (up to 32 core)
pencea
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2016
- Messages
- 74
This is very reminiscent to the discussion back in the days when people were trying to decide on whether to go for a high clock dual core or lower speed quad core for gaming.
There's a handful of games that already currenty scales with more than 4 cores, but yeah I get your point.
Attachments
BETA.
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2009
- Messages
- 2,906
What a time to be alive! Finally PC hardware is gettin stirred up. Good on AMD. Gonna keep my x99 rig, because I know price cuts coming in hot - gonna wait and see how the 6950x gets cut. However, definitely getting a Ryzen rig - may even become my daily driver! I may have to try and sell off this 5960x before the resell plummets to $250-$300. AMD coming in strong for sure!
pencea
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2016
- Messages
- 74
Seventyfive
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2004
- Messages
- 1,347
Now that most games are 64-bit and the majority of users are on an x64 OS, the vast majority of new games are multi core / multi thread so I'm pretty hopeful about this new chip. Even if the real world numbers come out and they aren't crushing Intel, hopefully it's strong enough to light a fire under intel's ass which would be great for everyone.
Zion Halcyon
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,108
You know AMD has a winner when Intel Fanbois are pre-emptively raging...
pencea
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2016
- Messages
- 74
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Vs Intel Core i7 6900K Gaming Performance Benchmarked
The first gaming performance face-off between the AMD Ryzen 7 1800X and the Intel Core i7 6900K. Both processors were put in a head-to-head comparison running the same game, the same in-game scenery and at the same time in Sniper Elite 4 at 4K. Both systems were identically spec’ed with dual RX 480s in Crossfire and 16GB of DDR4 memory.
Jarred Walton from PCWorld positioned the character and the camera in the exact same position on both systems. To ensure that both systems were rendering the exact same scene.
The Intel core i7 6900K averages at 90.5 fps while the Ryzen 7 1800X manages to push over 95 FPS and averages at 96.6fps. This is 6.7% performance lead.
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-i7-6900k-gaming-performance/
The first gaming performance face-off between the AMD Ryzen 7 1800X and the Intel Core i7 6900K. Both processors were put in a head-to-head comparison running the same game, the same in-game scenery and at the same time in Sniper Elite 4 at 4K. Both systems were identically spec’ed with dual RX 480s in Crossfire and 16GB of DDR4 memory.
Jarred Walton from PCWorld positioned the character and the camera in the exact same position on both systems. To ensure that both systems were rendering the exact same scene.
The Intel core i7 6900K averages at 90.5 fps while the Ryzen 7 1800X manages to push over 95 FPS and averages at 96.6fps. This is 6.7% performance lead.
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-i7-6900k-gaming-performance/
Last edited:
Is that cross you seem to insist on carrying in you CPU holy war getting heavy yet? The majority of your post count seems to be coming from this thread alone by the time I stopped even reading the replies you made in thread.
Whach
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,244
lol I'm actually glad there can finally be some fervent CPU fanboysim/arguments back. Good 'ol days. This is very much needed.