So about that 7700k...

  • Thread starter Deleted member 72990
  • Start date
KickAssCop said:
i7 7700K is not the CPU to purchase. Since launch of Ryzen CPUs suddenly all Intel 4 core processors are showing massive stuttering in games. AMD sorcery is at work.

Honestly, your setup to another 4 core X700K proc would not yield any significant gains.
Click to expand...

So on top of pulling bullshit out of your ass, you're also trying to insinuate that a Ryzen would do better when it's been proven ad nauseum to do consistantly worse at gaming?

Do us a favor, stop promoting your bias, thanks.
 
Errr. dude. That was a joke. See my sig. I don't give a shit about Ryzen. I was talking in general that all these stuttering nonsense AMD idiots are pulling out of their asses about sudden drop in 7700K performance is just that. Bullshit.
Also, 3770K -> 7700K is not a leap in performance especially considering his overclock. He is better off holding onto current setup until something comes along that is a significant leap.
 
"Ryzen? What can we say about Ryzen that hasn't already been said about Afghanistan?" (c) Dave Chappell AKA Silky Johnson, “Player Hater of the Year, 2002”

Look, I'm not going to sugar coat anything or dance around this subject. Ryzen has some performance issues for games 10- 20 - 30- 50+ fps difference across most games. Sorry, I'm not the one you're going to be able to plead Ryzen's case to and say, it's a lot better than their past CPU or Gaming is still pretty good. No, and, who cares.

I think the greatest crime out of all of this is all of a sudden you have a lot of people saying, but it has so many cores and matches the 6900K or whatever. Who cares? 99% of you are not going to be sitting there at your desk encoding shit. Laughable. But, for the ones that are, clearly Ryzen is what you want.


The absolute best purchase is the 7700K for $259 dollars from Microcenter. They have the CPU marked down between $289 and $299. On top of that, there is a $30 dollar instant discount if you buy a motherboard which most will be doing making the cpu $259. This is a REAL discount as Microcenter matches Amazon and Newegg anything. So the Motherboard is going to be priced the cheapest as well. Microcenter is awesome and I hope all of you have one within a 4 hour drive of you. Well worth the trip.

At 5Ghz, the 7700K literally matches a 5820K 6 core / 12 thread overclocked to 4.5Ghz. I know cause that's what I moved from. The 7700K @ 5ghz beats the 3930K which is a 6 core / 12 tread CPU.

The 7700K is a beast at 5Ghz and the fastest gaming CPU there is. The proof is all over the internet.

When the 7700K @ 5ghz is matched with a Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti starting the 10th and I will be among them. I will have the fastest gaming PC in the world along with everyone else running 1 or 2 x 1080 TI's .... That's an incredible thing to be able to say.

Also, ignore the people that talk about "it won't be worth it" .... look, any new CPU and chipset / motherboard and even the occasional firmware and driver update will generally yield slight to very slight improvements. The truth is, small improvements add up and add up big.

As far as I'm concerned, these people knee-cap themselves with this type of logic.

With all that said, Ryzen is THE CPU for you if you don't game. It's a hell of a productivity cpu but in my book, at the moment, that's it's main selling point.

Don't be a new "AMD Handbrake Nazi" like so many others are now. Who gives a shit about encoding your Sisters kids 12th Birthday party from 3tb down 1.2tb and how you saved a minute and 45 seconds over a 7700k? Who really gives a shit? Seriously.

"It's all about the Games and Porn Baby" (c) Dave Chappell AKA Tyrone Biggums
 
Last edited:
SixFootDuo said:
"Ryzen? What can we say about Ryzen that hasn't already been said about Afghanistan?" (c) Dave Chappell AKA Silky Johnson, “Player Hater of the Year, 2002”

Look, I'm not going to sugar coat anything or dance around this subject. Ryzen has some performance issues for games 10- 20 - 30- 50+ fps difference across most games. Sorry, I'm not the one you're going to be able to plead Ryzen's case to and say, it's a lot better than their past CPU or Gaming is still pretty good. No, and, who cares.

I think the greatest crime out of all of this is all of a sudden you have a lot of people saying, but it has so many cores and matches the 6900K or whatever. Who cares? 99% of you are not going to be sitting there at your desk encoding shit. Laughable. But, for the ones that are, clearly Ryzen is what you want.


The absolute best purchase is the 7700K for $259 dollars from Microcenter. They have the CPU marked down between $289 and $299. On top of that, there is a $30 dollar instant discount if you buy a motherboard which most will be doing making the cpu $259. This is a REAL discount as Microcenter matches Amazon and Newegg anything. So the Motherboard is going to be priced the cheapest as well. Microcenter is awesome and I hope all of you have one within a 4 hour drive of you. Well worth the trip.

At 5Ghz, the 7700K literally matches a 5820K 6 core / 12 thread overclocked to 4.5Ghz. I know cause that's what I moved from. The 7700K @ 5ghz beats the 3930K which is a 6 core / 12 tread CPU.

The 7700K is a beast at 5Ghz and the fastest gaming CPU there is. The proof is all over the internet.

When the 7700K @ 5ghz is matched with a Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti starting the 10th and I will be among them. I will have the fastest gaming PC in the world along with everyone else running 1 or 2 x 1080 TI's .... That's an incredible thing to be able to say.

Also, ignore the people that talk about "it won't be worth it" .... look, any new CPU and chipset / motherboard and even the occasional firmware and driver update will generally yield slight to very slight improvements. The truth is, small improvements add up and add up big.

As far as I'm concerned, these people knee-cap themselves with this type of logic.

With all that said, Ryzen is THE CPU for you if you don't game. It's a hell of a productivity cpu but in my book, at the moment, that's it's main selling point.

Don't be a new "AMD Handbrake Nazi" like so many others are now. Who gives a shit about encoding your Sisters kids 12th Birthday party from 3tb down 1.2tb and how you saved a minute and 45 seconds over a 7700k? Who really gives a shit? Seriously.

"It's all about the Games and Porn Baby" (c) Dave Chappell AKA Tyrone Biggums
Click to expand...


I have to agree here. The 7700k even with a modest OC and cooled on air is an amazing CPU. (see my sig) I came from a generation older in the 2600k series. But I love the new platform.
 
consider 7700k match 6900k in game performance, its obvious most game these day use only 4 core. Ryzen is a good all around CPU, so if you do any workstation stuff and play game its better than 7700k, if you only play game and can get $259 for 7700k, then get it. I would wait to get the best deal for ryzen/7700k. as for ryzen its not just about encoding but streaming and other work apps.
 
7700k is such trash. I wouldn't wish it upon my greatest enemy.
 
SixFootDuo said:
Blah blah 5GHz nonsense............................
Click to expand...

With regard to gaming, your statements are generally true. What's not true is the basic idea that you can buy any old 7700K and hit 5GHz with certainty. This is total bullshit. We know, we've tried. We've tried with far more CPUs than the average person ever would. We've talked to motherboard manufacturers about what they were seeing weeks in advance of the launch of these CPUs. At no point were we ever led to believe that 5.0GHz was ever going to be an easy task on Kaby Lake. ASUS usually tests some 100 CPUs prior to a new CPU launch and lay out just what you can expect out of what's probably the single largest sample size tested for overclocking performance.

According to the information we have, only about 20% of all Kaby Lake CPUs can hit 5.0GHz. The one I've got that does it had to be delidded and 5.0GHz is the very edge of what it can do. It takes a fair amount of tuning on a motherboard to make that happen with any real stability. 4.7GHz or even 4.8GHz is a more realistic expectation. So far that's the range of every CPU we've seen and tested. According to the motherboard manufacturers this is what the vast majority of CPUs can achieve under ideal conditions. There are some CPU's that do much worse than this. Some 10% of them or so may fall short of even 4.6GHz.

So please, you Kaby Lake fans need to stop proclaiming 5.0GHz as if its representational of what any enthusiast is likely to see out of the 7700K. It isn't, never has been, was never represented as, nor is it generally capable of 5.0GHz. There are certainly plenty of CPUs that can hit 5.0GHz or more, but your chances of getting a CPU that can do this are roughly 1 in 5. This is what was told to us by the motherboard makers and roughly what we've seen out of our test CPUs.
 
good video on future game, ryzen. as game move toward more core/thread, CPU headroom is important

 
Last edited:
s002wjh said:
good video on future game, ryzen. as game more toward more core/thread, CPU headroom is important

Click to expand...




This is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

Pretty soon games will stop being coded for 2 core systems and will move into 4 core and 8 thread. THEN in 5 years or so we will see a large number of games coded to take advantage of 8 core 16 thread systems.

I actually think that is the future of gaming. But for the next 5 years I see 4 core 8 thread as being a great performer. I don't see thread counts higher than that really coming into the gaming forefront quite yet. Video cards will continue to rule the roost because making art big and consuming video resources is a lot easier than making something require a lot of logic on the back end that a video card can't do better.

But when the 8 core 16 thread games are starting to come out streamers will want 16 core 32 thread. :)
 
AMD never focused on gaming. The reality is that AMD built a server CPU first and a desktop CPU second. There is potentially a lot more money in the server market and desktop's can and do very well using scaled down or feature reduced versions of server CPUs. It's what Intel does after all in its HEDT market segment. Those CPUs all began life as Xeons. I'm fairly certain that AMD figured its gaming performance was "good enough." At GPU limited resolutions the differences are minimal if they are present at all. There's a reason for that.
 
Dan_D said:
AMD never focused on gaming. The reality is that AMD built a server CPU first and a desktop CPU second. There is potentially a lot more money in the server market and desktop's can and do very well using scaled down or feature reduced versions of server CPUs. It's what Intel does after all in its HEDT market segment. Those CPUs all began life as Xeons. I'm fairly certain that AMD figured its gaming performance was "good enough." At GPU limited resolutions the differences are minimal if they are present at all. There's a reason for that.
Click to expand...
have you watch the video, look at overall improvement for game over years for AMD. if you only upgrade cpu every 2 years, then 7700k is better, but when plan to keep for 3-5 years, you want CPU with a lot headroom.
 
s002wjh said:
have you watch the video, look at overall improvement for game over years for AMD. if you only upgrade cpu every 2 years, then 7700k is better, but when plan to keep for 3-5 years, you want CPU with a lot headroom.
Click to expand...

The headroom comments come off as excuses to me. I haven't watched the video because I can't where I'm at right now. Still, I think the improvements likely come from game engines becoming more heavily threaded than they were at Bulldozer's launch. That said, you don't get linear performance improvements out of adding cores because not all workloads or tasks benefit all that much from multithreading. I don't think Ryzen has anymore "headroom" (WTF does that even mean?!?) than any 6, 8 or 10 core Intel CPU. In fact if anything they'd have less due to having worse performance (often worse IPC) in games now and lower clock speeds. If cache performance is indeed the problem with Ryzen and gaming in CPU limited situations, the issue isn't likely fixable without redesigning the CPU to some extent.
 
Last edited:
My home PC is used for about 50% gaming and 50% productivity (cad, rendering, web development, etc). I feel like I could use more MHz for games and more cores for productivity than I currently have. And some of the new features like motherboard m.2 support, additional lanes, quad channel, etc. would be nice and LGA-2066 will give me a longer term solution once it comes out. Looking forward to seeing what will be available :)
 
bjornb17 said:
My home PC is used for about 50% gaming and 50% productivity (cad, rendering, web development, etc). I feel like I could use more MHz for games and more cores for productivity than I currently have. And some of the new features like motherboard m.2 support, additional lanes, quad channel, etc. would be nice and LGA-2066 will give me a longer term solution once it comes out. Looking forward to seeing what will be available :)
Click to expand...

If you've got an X99 setup or a Z170/Z270 setup I don't think Ryzen has any value for you today. That may change if and when they release an HEDT like product or when we see what LGA 2066 brings to the table.
 
Dan_D said:
The headroom comments come off as excuses to me. I haven't watched the video because I can't where I'm at right now. Still, I think the improvements likely come from game engines becoming more heavily threaded than they were at Bulldozer's launch. That said, you don't get linear performance improvements out of adding cores because not all workloads or tasks benefit all that much from multithreading. I don't think Ryzen has anymore "headroom" (WTF does that even mean?!?) than any 6, 8 or 10 core Intel CPU. In fact if anything they'd have less due to having worse performance (often worse IPC) in games now and lower clock speeds. If cache performance is indeed the problem with Ryzen and gaming in CPU limited situations, the issue isn't likely fixable without redesigning the CPU to some extent.
Click to expand...

watch the video see how the FX improve over the years. as more developer patch and use more core for better performance, the chip with more core will get better and better. they already doing that with PS4/Xbox both are 8 core. if CPU use 95% vs something use 35%, then the latter can easily be patch and utilize for better performance in the future. the 95% is the bottleneck.
 
KickAssCop said:
Errr. dude. That was a joke. See my sig. I don't give a shit about Ryzen. I was talking in general that all these stuttering nonsense AMD idiots are pulling out of their asses about sudden drop in 7700K performance is just that. Bullshit.
Also, 3770K -> 7700K is not a leap in performance especially considering his overclock. He is better off holding onto current setup until something comes along that is a significant leap.
Click to expand...

My bad, your sarcasm went right over my head; maybe because it sounds exactly like some of the dribble AMD fanboys have been regurgitating lately.
 
s002wjh said:
watch the video see how the FX improve over the years. as more developer patch and use more core for better performance, the chip with more core will get better and better. they already doing that with PS4/Xbox both are 8 core. if CPU use 95% vs something use 35%, then the latter can easily be patch and utilize for better performance in the future. the 95% is the bottleneck.
Click to expand...
I hate to say it but by the time ryzen catches up in IPC I will be ready to upgrade again. I hope it really does make Intel sweat if not shift the scales in performance!!
 
So I got my M.2 installed in this system.... man it is stupidly fast :D
 
Dan_D said:
With regard to gaming, your statements are generally true. What's not true is the basic idea that you can buy any old 7700K and hit 5GHz with certainty. This is total bullshit. We know, we've tried. We've tried with far more CPUs than the average person ever would. We've talked to motherboard manufacturers about what they were seeing weeks in advance of the launch of these CPUs. At no point were we ever led to believe that 5.0GHz was ever going to be an easy task on Kaby Lake. ASUS usually tests some 100 CPUs prior to a new CPU launch and lay out just what you can expect out of what's probably the single largest sample size tested for overclocking performance.

According to the information we have, only about 20% of all Kaby Lake CPUs can hit 5.0GHz. The one I've got that does it had to be delidded and 5.0GHz is the very edge of what it can do. It takes a fair amount of tuning on a motherboard to make that happen with any real stability. 4.7GHz or even 4.8GHz is a more realistic expectation. So far that's the range of every CPU we've seen and tested. According to the motherboard manufacturers this is what the vast majority of CPUs can achieve under ideal conditions. There are some CPU's that do much worse than this. Some 10% of them or so may fall short of even 4.6GHz.

So please, you Kaby Lake fans need to stop proclaiming 5.0GHz as if its representational of what any enthusiast is likely to see out of the 7700K. It isn't, never has been, was never represented as, nor is it generally capable of 5.0GHz. There are certainly plenty of CPUs that can hit 5.0GHz or more, but your chances of getting a CPU that can do this are roughly 1 in 5. This is what was told to us by the motherboard makers and roughly what we've seen out of our test CPUs.
Click to expand...

Asus say 80% 5.0 stable with AVX offset at 4.8.
http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/
 
I am in the same boat as you...what it boils down to is most of the speed increase you will see is going to come from platform updates (faster SSD, memory, USB, etc). In that case, may as well wait for Skylake-X and get the best overall platform you can, since it will likely be another 3-4 years before you will need to upgrade again.

Going for the 7700 seems to be nothing more than scratching the upgrade itch. I was thinking of doing it too, but I know come Black Friday (when everything Skylake-X will likely be bargains) I will regret it.
 
mICKEL said:
Asus say 80% 5.0 stable with AVX offset at 4.8.
http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/
Click to expand...

If it's not stable at 5.0GHz while running AVX then it's not 24/7 stable at 5.0GHz now is it? Lowering the clock speed while AVX instructions are being leveraged tells me that CPU is stable at 4.8GHz, not 5.0GHz. Obviously, this only counts if you are running applications that use AVX but to me a truly stable overclock is 24/7 capable regardless of the workload.
 
Dan_D said:
With regard to gaming, your statements are generally true. What's not true is the basic idea that you can buy any old 7700K and hit 5GHz with certainty. This is total bullshit. We know, we've tried. We've tried with far more CPUs than the average person ever would. We've talked to motherboard manufacturers about what they were seeing weeks in advance of the launch of these CPUs. At no point were we ever led to believe that 5.0GHz was ever going to be an easy task on Kaby Lake. ASUS usually tests some 100 CPUs prior to a new CPU launch and lay out just what you can expect out of what's probably the single largest sample size tested for overclocking performance.

According to the information we have, only about 20% of all Kaby Lake CPUs can hit 5.0GHz. The one I've got that does it had to be delidded and 5.0GHz is the very edge of what it can do. It takes a fair amount of tuning on a motherboard to make that happen with any real stability. 4.7GHz or even 4.8GHz is a more realistic expectation. So far that's the range of every CPU we've seen and tested. According to the motherboard manufacturers this is what the vast majority of CPUs can achieve under ideal conditions. There are some CPU's that do much worse than this. Some 10% of them or so may fall short of even 4.6GHz.

So please, you Kaby Lake fans need to stop proclaiming 5.0GHz as if its representational of what any enthusiast is likely to see out of the 7700K. It isn't, never has been, was never represented as, nor is it generally capable of 5.0GHz. There are certainly plenty of CPUs that can hit 5.0GHz or more, but your chances of getting a CPU that can do this are roughly 1 in 5. This is what was told to us by the motherboard makers and roughly what we've seen out of our test CPUs.
Click to expand...

Well, on our side of the pond, you can pay more and get binned KL, that shops tested for different speeds... but they are pricey. 5,1 GHz tested goes for 600 euro, 5,0 is 480 and 4,9 is 420 - while vanilla is at 361 euro. So well, if you don't want to play the silicon lottery, you have to pay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top