AMD RYZEN... A GAME CHANGER!

[Simon771]

20 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I'm still waiting for someone to make a CPU with 4 fast cores and like 4 or 6 slower cores so you get the single-threaded of a high end quad core like a 7700k with the multi-threaded power of something like a 6900k / 6950x

And I'm just wiaiting for 8 core CPU with same IPC as i7 7700k at 5,0GHz  

[vanished]

Just now, Simon771 said:

And I'm just wiaiting for 8 core CPU with same IPC as i7 7700k at 5,0GHz  

I wonder which is more doable  

[Simon771]

1 minute ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I wonder which is more doable  

Well yours is more doable, since some phones are already using that technology.

But I don't think they will go to all that strugle with PCs. I would expect them to just boost performance on all cores, and figure out something about power usage and heat problems.

[ElZamo92]

The hype got me and made me preorder a ryzen 7 1700 against my will.

[Carfferd]

I have been waiting too long for this.. But I really hope it's indeed gonna be a game changer.

[This kid builds pc]

 

[This kid builds pc]

In the WAN show it still sounds like Linus is still a fanboy of Intel.

[LAwLz]

8 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I'm still waiting for someone to make a CPU with 4 fast cores and like 4 or 6 slower cores so you get the single-threaded of a high end quad core like a 7700k with the multi-threaded power of something like a 6900k / 6950x

Well, that's the point of turbo boost. Shut down a few cores to allow for the remaining ones to clock higher.

Too bad Intel doesn't care about upgrading their high end desktop platform that often (understandable) and won't give us more cores on the mainstream platform (hopefully this will change).

[Lengran]

9 hours ago, LAwLz said:

3) Now you're comparing an overclocked 500 dollar CPU against Intel's 340 dollar CPU at stock. That's stupid.

 

People who were interested in X99 will most likely be better off with Ryzen 7 though. Me included.

I agree with you for the first two points and the X99 things. But the pricing things are quite different in different places around the world.

 

I'm in China now. Let's take one of the most popular online shopping sites in China, JD.com as an example. (JD in China is just like the Amazon in the US)  An i7 7700k costs 2799RMB, But a Ryzen 1700 is just 2309RMB and a Ryzen 1700X is 2809RMB (a lunch will cost more than 10RMB in China). Also, a motherboard support overclocking like B350 is also much cheaper than a overclock enabled Z270 motherboard. For people in China, Ryzen 1700(X) still has its advantage. For those who don't want to spend too much money on their computers, Ryzen provides a choice which enables people to spend less money and get a CPU with lower TDP, higher multi-thread performance (and maybe higher overall performance, if the news about easy overclock is true). It's really appealing.

 

Of course, for those who have enough money, X99 is a better choice for high end computer.

----------------------------------------------------

All thing above are based on the price in China, where "dollar" is a "big" unit of money.? There's no doubt that people should make their own decision according to their own needs and buy whatever suit them best.

[SanityAgathion]

LTT, don't forget to contact Intel's PR department before you post reviews once Raisins are out and embargo falls down! 

 

 

Don't believe everything that's on the internet. That goes both ways.

 

Unless it will be really flop in terms of performance - on the other hand, even if it will be 20% below intel's top CPU, still, 50% of the price ... that's really nice. Definitely an improvement over my current FX, I can safely say that.

[vanished]

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Well, that's the point of turbo boost. Shut down a few cores to allow for the remaining ones to clock higher.

Too bad Intel doesn't care about upgrading their high end desktop platform that often (understandable) and won't give us more cores on the mainstream platform (hopefully this will change).

Except Turbo boost has a few issues.  For one, due to how windows schedules tasks in a way that takes a single thread and "spreads it out" over the whole CPU (running in on one core for a brief moment, then moving it to another one, then another one, etc., creating the illusion that it's using, say, 4 core each to 25% when in reality it's only ever on one) the CPU sees this as all cores being used and never goes above its lowest turbo speed.  I've witnessed this myself in tests, and with some tinkering, you can get it to work properly by forcing it to run on just one core, but generally speaking this is one issue.  The other issue is Turbo boost doesn't seem to be enough, or we'd see chips like the 6900k with whatever base speed and min boost, but a max boost of like 4.5 GHz, not 3.7.

[Dave In Manila]

@LinusTech  As respected content creators, I'd really appreciate a Content Create Benchmark on Ryzen Episode,  I'm really interested in Building an editing rig on Ryzen, and have seen some stuff from Puget Systems, but nothing I would consider definitive yet, or from a source that does content creation for a living.

 

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Premiere-Pro-CC-2017-AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X-1800X-Performance-909/

[DKwilliamson]

Ryzen is gonna shine in the market

[GDRRiley]

want to see you you make the 6 and quad cores