Ryzen vs Coffee Lake

Discussion in 'AMD Processors' started by adobian, Nov 2, 2017.

  1. adobian

    adobian Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    269
    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Has anyone bought a Ryzen 1700 and overclocked it then regret that you could have bought the i7 8700K instead ?
     
  2. JustReason

    JustReason razor1 is my Lover

    Messages:
    2,497
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2015
    I doubt there will be many. Add that the stock levels of the 8700 are non-existent then the whole question you posture becomes moot.
     
  3. _mockingbird

    _mockingbird Gawd

    Messages:
    652
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2017
    I regret nothing.

    I am glad that AMD has my money.

    If we leave it up to Intel, we would be stuck with quad-core for the mainstream processors for another decade.
     
  4. Gideon

    Gideon [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,711
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Been enjoying mine since 2 weeks after launch, I have no regrets and likely wont upgrade again until Zen 3 launches a option I would not have on the Intel side.
     
    dvsman likes this.
  5. mwnn

    mwnn n00bie

    Messages:
    35
    Joined:
    May 3, 2015
    There's little to regret - that's certainly not the case for anyone who bought the 7700k or 6700k with a top end board for top end prices.
    Yet another socket change from Intel.
    eBay is bound to be flooded with older quad core Intel chips soon.
    The 8700k seems to get quite toasty when pushed.

    Any of these modern Intel/AMD chips are more than adequate now for the majority of tasks.
    I'd expect a slight AMD price cut.
    AM4 B350 boards are inexpensive for what they offer. Soldered heat spreader vs paste (which isn't cutting the mustard)
    If AMD manage to push up the single threaded score up a bit higher with the next iteration they'll still be a solid purchase.

    The only long standing issue will be what brand the game developers optimise for - typically it's always Intel.
    There's always a few compromises with AMD setups - usually slower/flaky memory support.
    Best to delay any upgrade for a little bit longer.
     
    Vercinaigh and elites2012 like this.
  6. Nightfire

    Nightfire Gawd

    Messages:
    883
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2017
    What 8700k? You mean the unavailable one that is selling on newegg for $60 over MSRP on a motherboard that costs up to to $50 more?
     
  7. Dermac

    Dermac Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    152
    Joined:
    May 6, 2005
    No, I could have not got the 1700 in March and not have enjoyed the benefits of this little beauty up until after now considering stock levels of 8700k's in the wild. If building now, it still would be the 1700. If building when Intel actually has stock of 8700k's at MSRP, it still would be the 1700. The 2 extra cores and the thermal temps on the 1700 are more beneficial to me than the extra mhz on the cores.
     
  8. buttons

    buttons [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,991
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    I bought my 1700 at launch from microcenter and have no regrets. The 8700 looks like a nice chip, but it doesnt make me jealous in the least bit. I paid $400 for my chip and board 7 months ago and i have 2c/4t more.
     
    elites2012 likes this.
  9. Rifter0876

    Rifter0876 n00bie

    Messages:
    20
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2017
    I bought my 1700 as soon as it was available in canada a few weeks after launch. I regret nothing. Gaming however is not the main use of my PC, i do alot of photo and video work and do still game but gaming is a secondary use for me. Bottom line is the same now as it was in march, if building a gaming PC Intel is the best bet, if building a productivity PC that can still game, especially at higher resolutions then Ryzen offers more bang for the buck.
     
  10. ZiggyDeath

    ZiggyDeath Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    180
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    I do regret it, but only in retrospect - I thought Intel's response wouldn't happen until 2018. I built my system in July.

    However, I'm more interested in the 8700 rather than the 8700K.
     
  11. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,296
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    I owned a 1700x and its a really fast.

    I aso own an 8700k and its a very fast chip.

    Abd I own a 1950x and its a very fast chip.

    And I own a 7820x and I javent installed it so I dont know but what I do know is to never have any regrets. I essentially own 2x 1800x smashed together and the differences do not warrant regret. Enjoy your 1700 as it will and has been delivering for many. Plus zen2 should really brinf the IPC up higher and you will have a good upgrade path.
     
    N4CR, noko and JustReason like this.
  12. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,296
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Technically intel hasnt responded. Have fun finding these mythical coffee flavored hunks of silicon. I got like retardedly lucky to find mine.
     
  13. ZiggyDeath

    ZiggyDeath Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    180
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    True, however...

    The system it replaced was a gaming laptop with a i7-4800MQ, which could hold it's 3.7ghz turbo indefinitely. Effectively, I sidegraded to a processor that simply had more cores, over something that had higher CS/IPC (7700k).

    Basically I built my Ryzen system with the prediction that Intel would not have 6c/12t parts for a year.

    I'm sure I could build a 8700 system sometime between now and next July - which means my bet failed.

    Of course I am interested in what Zen2 has to bring to the table. However this future Zen2 would have to bring a clockspeed/IPC gain of about 20% over a overclocked Ryzen 7 for me to be interested.


    *Further edit: I'm still having issues running my ram at 2933. I rolled the dice on this, and went with 2x16gb 3200mhz with Samsung B-die, rather than the safer 2x8gb or 4x8gb setups. This choice was made because I almost always throw more ram into a system after about 2 years.

    I could get it to run P95 with no problems, but whenever the videocard was engaged, the system would immediately blue screen after a few seconds. So I'm running it at 2667 (which is technically beyond AMD spec still). This was on 1.0.0.5, haven't had the chance to flash her to 1.0.0.6 yet.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2017
  14. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,296
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Hrrmm On my Threadripper 1950x I found that enabling Enhanced Core Performance, I think it was something like that from AUto to Enabled, and suddenly my ram just works wonderfully. I can't remember the exact setting but it was purely by chance.
     
  15. ZiggyDeath

    ZiggyDeath Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    180
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    If memory serves, TR is a lot more forgiving with ram configurations than Ryzen. OTOH I chose the most difficult 2 stick configuration, short of getting Hynix memory.
     
    tangoseal likes this.
  16. TheHig

    TheHig Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    365
    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2016
    I picked up my R7 1700 for 250 NIB off ebay with the slickdeals 50 dollar off coupon a while back. No regrets whatsoever. Running it all day at 3900 on 1.3ish vcore via Pstate OC under an H100v2. Sprung for the Taichi mobo which was a bit spendy but I did pick this cpu up to OC a bit and the quality of this board is just terrific. Personally I feel the most interesting CL CPU is the i5 8400 at 189-99 for a really great fire and forget budget gamer build. However you cant get that either right now so...
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2017
    Nightfire likes this.
  17. Private_Ops

    Private_Ops [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,809
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    The OP seems like a weak attempt to start a flame war thread.
     
  18. JustReason

    JustReason razor1 is my Lover

    Messages:
    2,497
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2015
    Maybe, but it didn't work.
     
    baca and dragonstongue like this.
  19. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    20,518
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    definitely would recommend updating the bios first but have you tried disabling gear down mode and DDR power down state in the bios? i found that fixed most of my stability issues with ram similar to what you're having. may or may not work, could also mess with sub voltages and crap but most of that's over my head so i'm not going to suggest anything specific for that.
     
  20. Stanley Pain

    Stanley Pain 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,315
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2001
    I was just in the market for a new build (Network interfaces failing on my Sandy Bridge). I was initially going to go Ryzen, and then Coffee Lake came out and I finally decided:


    upload_2017-11-6_10-22-5.png


    :D :D
     
  21. ZiggyDeath

    ZiggyDeath Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    180
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    The only thing I tried was increasing the voltage to the memory controller? It was recommended by AMD's OC guide as it supposedly helped with ram that was running out of official spec.

    I'm not too worried about getting my ram to 2933 or 3200... yet.
     
  22. PnkPwrRngr

    PnkPwrRngr Gawd

    Messages:
    852
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    My x58 system is finally starting to break down, and I'm in the market to build either a Ryzen or Coffee Lake system. My machine is primarily used for gaming.

    After pricing out a 8600k system and a 1700x system, they both came out pretty equal. I had to account for a cooler purchase for the Ryzen system as my current cooler is compatible.

    Which direction would you lean IF availability wasn't an issue, and both systems would cost roughly the same?
     
  23. ssnyder28

    ssnyder28 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,233
    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    On a day to day basis can you take advantage of more than 6 cores with your PC or what you plan to do with it? If so go Ryzen, if not go 8600k. In the end you're talking about 6 cores/6 threads vs 8 cores/16 threads, 8600k wins in gaming and light threaded usages while the ryzen will thrive in heavily threaded workloads.
     
  24. Montu

    Montu [H]ard DCOTM x4

    Messages:
    7,915
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001

    He's primarily gaming so sounds like a 8600K is the right purchase for him.
     
    ssnyder28 likes this.
  25. TMCM

    TMCM [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,275
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    If I was building a new machine I'd go with either the ryzen or TR. I can tell that I'm getting a little "stuttering" on my system when I game. But I also don't shut down every program when I game, I just leave it running
     
    JustReason likes this.
  26. ZiggyDeath

    ZiggyDeath Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    180
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    If he can swing the extra money, and doesn't plan to OC, I think a 8700 is a better buy. There are games out there that are sensitive enough where there is a tangible difference between 6c/6t and 6c/12t.
     
  27. PnkPwrRngr

    PnkPwrRngr Gawd

    Messages:
    852
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    I plan on overclocking, so maybe I swing for the 8700k. I thought I read that the additional L3 cache in the i7 also improve game performance over the i5 and Ryzen.
     
  28. Nightfire

    Nightfire Gawd

    Messages:
    883
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2017
    With no b360 boards on thehorizon, you might as well go 8700k if you are willing to go 8700. It is not much more and you are forced to get z370 anyhow.
     
  29. ZiggyDeath

    ZiggyDeath Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    180
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    I'd chalk down most of the difference to the extra threads.

    And the threads do matter, at least in a game like Crysis it does.
     
  30. bobzdar

    bobzdar [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,460
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Not possible to buy an 8700k at anywhere near the same price, let alone back in March when I got the 1700. Even now it's not worth the extra money for less threads. Gaming, along with everything else, is moving to more threads, not less, so I think 8c/16t is more future proof. Plus I know I'll be able to upgrade this chip to a next gen one and not get shafted by a new socket, unlike with the 8700k. 8700k seems almost a sucker bet, tbh, unless you only play older games at low resolution and get frustrated if it doesn't run 200fps.
     
    N4CR likes this.
  31. arnemetis

    arnemetis 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,165
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Been hearing this BS for many years, things are moving to more threads. Picked up an 8 core AMD 8350 back in 2014, clocked to 4.6ghz as I have it today. There are still a lot of use cases for single thread performance, I almost never see all of my threads used. A lot of productivity programs are still, and always will be, single threaded. A lot of games will struggle to realistically use more than 4 threads. I plan on getting an 8700k for the single thread performance, that AMD simply cannot touch. I can't imagine the game that would perform better on a ryzen setup vs an 8700k, two more cores doesn't make up for the difference in per thread performance. When your computer sits and you're waiting on something, THAT is when you notice it. You don't notice 190 vs 200fps.

    I will continue to wait for my 8700k for my main machine. My ryzen 1700x works great for my plex server, but not for my main pc. If Intel offered me a 4c/8t cpu @ 6ghz, I would pick that up instead.
     
  32. ZiggyDeath

    ZiggyDeath Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    180
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    If I'm not mistaken, there are some architectural reasons prior to Ryzen as to why AMD processors couldn't fully leverage their core advantage. Something to do with the scheduler, effectively making the 8c part operate more similarly to a 4c part.

    In anycase...

    There are many use cases for single thread performance. But the issue with simply having faster clocks/IPC gains on a single thread is that it is diminishing returns. In your theoretical example, a 6ghz Intel would be 20% faster than a 5ghz Intel. But that 20% will only manifest itself if there are no other bottlenecks, and there are plenty.

    At some point, to get real gains, you need to start tapping into more threads. You say that a lot of games struggle to use more than 4 threads, and that is generally true. However I think the question that then needs to be asked is, do those games really give you a tangible benefit going from 4ghz to 5ghz.

    IMO if you need single thread performance one of the first things you need to figure out is how much performance do you need?
    Do you need 5ghz? Is 4ghz enough (Ryzen)? If 4ghz is enough, can you afford more threads?

    Conversely if you need more threads then it becomes:
    How many threads do I really need? If <6 threads are needed (i7-8), can I benefit from higher clocks or afford higher clocks?

    Also a key question is, system longevity, how long do you expect the system to last? I asked myself these questions when the debate between the Q6600 vs the E8400 happened years ago. Based on my own use case, I made the correct call with going with the much slower Q6600 - and I kept my system running for several years after all my online buddies had thrown their heavily OC'd E8400 to the curb.

    I agree that the 8700/8700K is very attractive, but it is also a much more expensive chip/setup. I would not, however, not jump on a theoretical 4c 6ghz processor - when I evaluated a 7700k vs a Ryzen 7, there wasn't a doubt in my mind which one suited me better.

    *I realize there are differences in terms of IPC between a KL/CL and Ryzen, and a Ryzen running at 4ghz is still slower than an Intel.
    Also, not everyone had the budget to buy a server computer and gaming machine. In my case, I retire old machines to server duty, which means that I already have a retirement plan for this Ryzen in ~4 years. Currently server duty is relegated to a gaming laptop.
     
  33. arnemetis

    arnemetis 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,165
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Good points. I had actually planned on retiring this machine as my server, and building my new pc...but I needed the server upgrade before the 8700k could be bought. I actually had my q6600 before this at 3.85ghz for years, was a great chip! That motherboard burst into flames however...

    The funny thing is with the 1700x system, I still see the same slow downs doing specific tasks (usually pdf and autocad related) and while they are quite a bit faster on the ryzen system than my 8350, they are still slow, and they are still only pegging a single thread. I have not overclocked it, but it does go to 3.9 on its own with a single heavy load. So for me personally, I know for a fact that I am still single thread limited for my workloads.

    I've lived with the 8350 for three years now, and could stomach giving my file server a 1700x while I sat on this, so obviously I am patient with my upgrades. I expect the 8700k will last me three years easy.

    Gaming I'm not worried at all. If that was my primary concern, I probably would have just stuck with a Ryzen! I plan o ngetting a 1440 display and a 1080 ti so the cpu won't matter either way for that front. The reality is I don't game as much as I could in years past, so I can't let that be the deciding factor for my pc. AS mentioned previously, my work from home is more important, and I am limited by single thread performance.

    Finally to be clear because I feel like I didn't come across correctly initially, I think for a lot of people Ryzen is a great value, even for actual gamers (who the hell builds a ryzen system to play 1080p or less anyway and is cpu limited?)
     
  34. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    20,518
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    yeah those reasons make sense.

    that has always been my biggest gripe with autocad, there's absolutely no excuse after all these years for an application like that to be single thread limited.
     
  35. ZiggyDeath

    ZiggyDeath Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    180
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    I only tested mine up to 3.2ghz, at that point it was borderline thermal throttling. I refused to increase my fan speeds because I built it to be silent - had whatever 120mm tower Noctua had at that time. Also didn't like how OCs at the time pegged it, which meant idle temps went way up.

    Funnily enough, it was a great undervolter, it was running just over 1V at under load, and something like 0.65v at idle. Literally cut 20C off the temps across the board.
    My last attempt with the Ryzen showed me it MIGHT be stable 3.9ghz @ 1.45v. Which is a pretty big jump from 3.8ghz @ 1.32v. Given the much greater heat generation, I doubt I'll push this chip past 3.7ghz when I finally decide to run an OC. So yeah, I'm somewhat limited in single thread as well. But I wasn't expecting to run an OC greater than the turbo clocks anyways - good thing since it looks like I lost the lottery.
    /raises hand
    I stuck in a GTX 1080Ti and am just waiting for a good deal on a 1440p 144hz IPS.
     
    arnemetis likes this.
  36. Algrim

    Algrim [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,203
    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2016
    I'm waiting for monitors to standardize on syncing technology before I jump. I never bought a Freesync or Gsync monitor as I don't want to be locked into a particular ecosystem. So, whilst the 1070 is overkill for what I play at 1080p it wouldn't be at 1440p. Unfortunately, inexpensive non-vendor-lock tech is progressing less rapidly than I hoped so I'm in the 1080p ranks until that situation changes.
     
  37. bobzdar

    bobzdar [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,460
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    I think the new Assassin's creed game is now using over 8 threads - yeah, finally.

    Like you said, though, either one will be fine in 1080p stuff and above that you're not cpu limited anyway. I just think we're finally seeing the more threads pay off (consoles seem to be driving it in gaming) and it's not trending to less threads, that's for sure. I've been on long upgrade cycles, so for my money and looking at the threading trend now, I felt 8c/16t was going to be more future proof even if it gave up some in single threaded stuff.
     
  38. jardows

    jardows [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,223
    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2015
    Truth is, though, at 1080 resolution, while you may see differences due to CPU, you won't be "limited" in that the fps differences won't make any gameplay or visual quality differences
     
  39. ZiggyDeath

    ZiggyDeath Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    180
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2017
    I typically build a system "for life". Very little of the main specifications change over the lifespan - only ram, and hdds, or replacement parts. That's why I go to pretty long lengths to make sure the CPU/GPU pairing is relatively balanced.

    I see monitors as generally lasting longer than the lifespan of a system, so while Gsync would be nice, it's not at the top of the make/break list.
    I'm currently running a 1080p 60hz IPS, so effectively nothing matters. I stuck the 1080Ti in for several reasons.

    The 1070 prices were jacked thanks to crypto.
    I didn't see the 1060 6gb being cheap enough + a replacement card 2 years down the line, being better and cheaper. I know there are people hyped up about Volta, but everything I've seen about its CUDA cores basically say incremental improvement over Pascal - I don't believe the Tensor cores are going to be usable for gfx purposes?
    The incremental performance increase of the 1080 over the 1070 wasn't worth the ticket price. And as far as I was concerned, it didn't get me into 1440P gaming.
    But the 1080 Ti actually was twice the card for twice the price of a 1070... so I just bit the bullet.

    What really sucks right now is I am seeing crazy screen tearing... Something my GTX880m couldn't do...
     
  40. crazycrave

    crazycrave Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    211
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2016
    When you been around since 2003 gaming you learn more about value and how fast it go's away .. then you learn limits as who in there right mind spends $500 on a video card after being burned by this mistake everytime a new GTX TI /Fury Vega comes along and in 2 to 3 years they look like the 970GTX grade of performance . You want to know that performance will scale over time and not drop off .