Jump to content

AMD Ryzen reviewers say: - Either experiencing weird results or not recommened for gaming

kladzen
By kladzen
in Tech News
 Share
Posted
2 minutes ago, Mihle said:

AMD compared Ryzen mostly with 6800k and 6900k, not 7700k.

And 6800k and 6900k are the ones on the enthusiast platform(x99)...

- ASUS X99 Deluxe - i7 5820k - Nvidia GTX 1080ti SLi - 4x4GB EVGA SSC 2800mhz DDR4 - Samsung SM951 500 - 2x Samsung 850 EVO 512 -

- EK Supremacy EVO CPU Block - EK FC 1080 GPU Blocks - EK XRES 100 DDC - EK Coolstream XE 360 - EK Coolstream XE 240 -

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
Just now, DraconicFire98 said:

but they only spoke about it being better in things like cinebench and handbrake. next to no mention about gaming

for those 5 or so games that take advantage of it. lol

They did talk about gaming. A lot. In fact, it was one of the main points they made when they did the "Ryzen reveal" a while back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
3 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

And 6800k and 6900k are the ones on the enthusiast platform(x99).

I know, my point is that 7700k isnt.

“Remember to look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. And however difficult life may seem, there is always something you can do and succeed at. 
It matters that you don't just give up.”

-Stephen Hawking

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

They did talk about gaming. A lot. In fact, it was one of the main points they made when they did the "Ryzen reveal" a while back.

Not really, less than 1/3 of the things they have showed is gaming, other 2/3 was not, it was things like rendering, handbrake, and stuff.

“Remember to look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. And however difficult life may seem, there is always something you can do and succeed at. 
It matters that you don't just give up.”

-Stephen Hawking

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
Just now, Mihle said:

Not really, 1/3 of the things they have showed is gaming, other 2/3 was not, it was things like rendering, handbrake, and stuff.

It was mostly benchmarks that don't matter.

 

I'm not saying this is a terrible CPU platform. I'm saying they set expectations way too high and underdelivered. I want to know if this memory bug is even what is holding them back from outpacing a mere 7700k.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author
4 minutes ago, Tataffe said:

@kladzen You can update the OP with this list: https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/5x3cvv/ryzen_review_mega_thread/

 

Or add the link to the OP so people can see more than your three cherry-picked reviews ...

I did not cherry pick any of the reviews.. i simply searched on google for amd ryzen new information less than an hour ago.. and i took some random reviews - But this is a nice big overview...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
4 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

It was mostly benchmarks that don't matter.

 

I'm not saying this is a terrible CPU platform. I'm saying they set expectations way too high and underdelivered. I want to know if this memory bug is even what is holding them back from outpacing a mere 7700k.

If you expected it to do well in all games, its your expectations that was to high. Not what AMD showed. becaue they didnt show much gaming at all, especially not with 7700k.
the ONLY thing they showed against 7700k was in gaming while streaming. all others was vs. 6800k and 6900k, that is worse single core peformance than 7700k.
AMD never aimed Ryzen at normal gamers, they armed it at people that do rendering, streaming, or video editing.

 

And the things they showed DOES matter, but not for gamers. because they didnt aim them at gamers.

“Remember to look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. And however difficult life may seem, there is always something you can do and succeed at. 
It matters that you don't just give up.”

-Stephen Hawking

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
10 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

Stop making excuses for them. They literally talked about how much better than they were than Intel's 6800k and 6900k. I guarantee you based on how this looks, the 6-core and 4-core chips are going to suck.

 

It's going to be Bulldozer all over again it looks like.

Most Reviewers have AMD overall performance beating Intel chips double the price.... when it comes to only gaming in the real world the differences is not large but Yes Intel is better.

 

I Personally don't find this surprising we all knew Intel was going to have better IPC and also clocks higher. Gaming is not about core counts  Single thread performance is big for gaming performance. some higher end Intel CPUs do worse in gaming then lower core count ones for this exact reason Though not as big of a hit since there IPC are still good. 

 

If your building Only a Gaming Computer I would personally say just go with a 7600k or 7700k. (7600k for cost reasons).  If you want to multitask  Stream and game or workstation/ heavy CPU stuff go with a 1700-1800X the price points make this very good here. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

WTH?  Sorry, in what way are the ryzen CPUs bad?  For the 1080p 200+ fps crowd?  I guess someone gives a shit...not me.

 

OP please fix the copy-paste job and remove the formatting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 minutes ago, Mihle said:

And the things they showed DOES matter, but not for gamers. because they didnt aim them at gamers.

amd fueled the hype train. their demo showed ryzen would beat comparable intel cpus or atleast match. their marketing material emphasized gamers were also their target. 

see from 21:00 ..amd should not have engineered their performance measures.

i knew ryen will have some ipc deficit...but daum intel architecture is just too superior. the price/performance looks really good for productivity but really disapointed in gaming performance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
42 minutes ago, RKRiley said:

Why did people expect an 8 core/16 thread to be as good as a 7700k for gaming in the first place?

 

have you met people... people are fucking stupid. lol

 

 


im still buying one, i do alot of gaming,but i want to expand into other things. do some video editing and stuff like that, also just have fun with the hardware itself.

also i want a machine that could run a CAD better then a 4300... it had issues just loading the last one :S

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
6 minutes ago, Hunter06 said:

their marketing material emphasized gamers were also their target. 

 

 

What do you mean? If you mean they showed gaming benchmarks, yes they did, but it was far from what they had the weight on. Most of the benchmarks AMD showed was aimed at rendering, or things like that, not gaming.

“Remember to look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. And however difficult life may seem, there is always something you can do and succeed at. 
It matters that you don't just give up.”

-Stephen Hawking

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
10 minutes ago, AceTakerV8 said:

Give AMD more time for optimization. It's a completely new platform, which they're still trying to make better. I believe that the platform will get better over time.

optimize what?! or you expect AMD to recall the CPUs?

CPUs can't be optimized once they're manufactured - what you see is what you get - Bulldozer was shit at launch, remained shit 6y later

 

OSes can get microcode updates to fix/disable some of the issues that arise after, but you won't see performance gains

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 minutes ago, Mihle said:

 

What do you mean? If you mean they showed gaming benchmarks, yes they did, but it was far from what they had the weight on. Most of the benchmarks AMD showed was aimed at rendering, or things like that.

the results i saw were as far as im concerned, very acceptable, non of the games were terrible on it, none of the programs ran terrible on it, it slotted into a sorta funny area, but thats not a bad thing, its not bad at gaming and its not bad at heavy workloads. its really a classy jack of all. and its cost effective

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
Just now, zMeul said:

optimize what?! or you expect AMD to recall the CPUs?

CPUs can't be optimized once they're manufactured - what you see is what you get

 

OSes can get microcode updates to fix/disable some of the issues that arise after, but you won't see performance gains

i think what he means is wait for them to do a refresh\+ models, where most of all the bug n junk are worked out and everything gets "optimized"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
Just now, ArcThanatos said:

i think what he means is wait for them to do a refresh\+ models, where most of all the bug n junk are worked out and everything gets "optimized"

AMD said Zen is on 4y product cycle .. that's a long time to wait

and Intel won't just sit with their hands under their collective asses in the meantime - X299 platform is due later this year

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author
24 minutes ago, MoonSpot said:

WTH?  Sorry, in what way are the ryzen CPUs bad?  For the 1080p 200+ fps crowd?  I guess someone gives a shit...not me.

 

OP please fix the copy-paste job and remove the formatting.

updated the OP to be more clean.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
16 minutes ago, Hunter06 said:

amd fueled the hype train. their demo showed ryzen would beat comparable intel cpus or atleast match. their marketing material emphasized gamers were also their target. 

see from 21:00 ..amd should not have engineered their performance measures.

i knew ryen will have some ipc deficit...but daum intel architecture is just too superior. the price/performance looks really good for productivity but really disapointed in gaming performance. 

 

This is said in MANY reviews, but the FPS differences are due to the current Known high speed ram issue, which is also already known to be getting a bios update fix later on. 

CPU: Amd 7800X3D | GPU: AMD 7900XTX

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
Just now, zMeul said:

AMD said Zen is on 4y product cycle .. that's a long time to wait

and Intel won't just sit with their hands under their collective asses in the meantime - X299 platform is due later this year

so, 4yr is long enough for both teams to do some work on their chips, AMD isn't going to release ryzen and hope it sells till the end of time either. its going to go back to a competition. AMD has always come up with a + model and its never greatly far down the line, intels got Coffeelake\cannonlake coming out, so expect AMD to after that start with the + model

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
6 minutes ago, zMeul said:

AMD said Zen is on 4y product cycle .. that's a long time to wait

and Intel won't just sit with their hands under their collective asses in the meantime - X299 platform is due later this year

If I did understand it right, 4y was not for the next like series of product, it was for a new architecture. like a "tick" they will do optimization of what Ryzen is now before 4 years. Tweaking, if you would call it that.

“Remember to look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. And however difficult life may seem, there is always something you can do and succeed at. 
It matters that you don't just give up.”

-Stephen Hawking

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
45 minutes ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

A few notes>

  • Ryzen was never meant to beat Intel
  • Since when have 8c/16t chips ever dominate the much higher clocked 4c/8t chips?
  • If you want to see whether Ryzen is truly going to be dominated in gaming, wait for the R3 and R5 lineup.

Case closed

100% this, you can't compare a 4/8 CPU to a 8/16 for gaming, quad cores can hit much higher clock speeds than octo cores. We'll have to wait for the 6/12, 4/8 and 4/4 CPUs to really compare Ryzen to Intel for gaming.

 

I really can't wait to see what the 4/4 can do, I mean, four real cores for 130$? That CPU just might rule the budget world. The 4/8 though.. Holy shit, for 170$ it could potentially be amazing. The 7700k is 350$ iirc, so that's literally half the price. If it can clock pretty highly, maybe 4.5ghzish, it'll be amazing.

i7 2600k @ 5GHz 1.49v - EVGA GTX 1070 ACX 3.0 - 16GB DDR3 2000MHz Corsair Vengence

Asus p8z77-v lk - 480GB Samsung 870 EVO w/ W10 LTSC - 2x1TB HDD storage - 240GB SATA SSD w/ W7 - EVGA 650w 80+G G2

3x 1080p 60hz Viewsonic LCDs, 1 glorious Dell CRT running at anywhere from 60hz to 120hz

Model M w/ Soarer's adapter - Logitch g502 - Audio-Techinca M20X - Cambridge SoundWorks speakers w/ woofer

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
Just now, goodtofufriday said:

This is said in MANY reviews, but the FPS differences are due to the current Known high speed ram issue, which is also already known to be getting a bios update fix later on. 

i doubt it. they ryzen is already oficially supporting 2666. gamer nexus did his benchmarks at 2933mhz. the benifit from ram speed dont seem to matter after around 2800-2900mhz. fixing the ram issue may improve synthetic results or productivity but gaming.. not very likely. the per core performance is lagging...maybe the zen architecture will be more efficient in the future refresh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
3 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

"This is normal" "We expected this" fans right now:

 

Image result for everything is ok dog

But we did? the 1700-1800x were supposed to sit between the 7700k and the 6900k. And they do. 

And we also expected some fps issues in games due to the ram speed issue thats getting a fix.

 

What about the results for the R7 series did we not expect?

CPU: Amd 7800X3D | GPU: AMD 7900XTX

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing Tech News

×