Further proof that Windows 10 is causing a perf hit with the Ryzen CPU

[zMeul]

9 hours ago, SCHISCHKA said:

and expect to see more game developers ditching Intel's biased and expensive compiler

that's just a lie

I'd like you to prove it

 

game developers are most likely to use MSVC - that's MS' compiler and it's vendor agnostic

and how about the games AMD helped develop?! eh...

 

and the compute workloads where Ryzen shows better performance? were those compiled with AMD's compiler then 

 

---

 

and here's the funny thing on that Intel compiler, it produces worse results than MS'

 

[zMeul]

23 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

For that kind of code.

 

There's no loop there, there are no places to optimize by reducing stalls, nothing to vectorize, there's no parallel work and so on.

that's an example

if on that kinda code it performs worse, how'd you think it would perform on complex task

 

and checking the compiler used is extremely easy:

[raphidy]

Damn, AMD fine wine is real. You have to wait 6-12 months and the drivers will be good.

[Coaxialgamer]

Interesting... Although i don't quite know what to make of it though... 

[samcool55]

Sounds like something GN would put some time into.

Let's hope at least someone properly figures this out!

[79wjd]

6 hours ago, tlink said:

any cpu can be used for gaming, its really silly to argue if its a gaming cpu or not because its not a technical term.

 

because a company always tries to tap in as many markets as possible to create a diverse income revenue stream. they just showed gaming performance as a side thing to get us riled up for the ryzen lineup as a whole. gamers are not the intended users for a cpu like that. how many times am i going to have to pull the 6850k into this to explain that ithe r7's target audience is the same audience as the 6850k target audience.

Watch the New Horizons stream. Lisa Su was going on and on about how amazing ryzen is for gaming (even when she was specifically talking about the R7 lineup).

 

[HalGameGuru]

People seem to be conflating "good at gaming" with "the BEST at gaming" the r7 series is GOOD at gaming. It is NOT the BEST. It is competitive with similar CPU's and offers strengths and weaknesses in different areas from them. You can game just fine on them. And if you wish to stream, the primary gaming use case for an 8 core cpu, you have a leg up with the cores needed to push higher quality streams through the meager bitrates streaming services allow. Even the FX-8350 was being promoted as a decent CPU for gamers wanting to stream because the extra cores at the low price made streaming an easier endeavor with that CPU than the equivalently priced intel CPU.

[79wjd]

7 minutes ago, HalGameGuru said:

People seem to be conflating "good at gaming" with "the BEST at gaming" the r7 series is GOOD at gaming. It is NOT the BEST. It is competitive with similar CPU's and offers strengths and weaknesses in different areas from them. You can game just fine on them. And if you wish to stream, the primary gaming use case for an 8 core cpu, you have a leg up with the cores needed to push higher quality streams through the meager bitrates streaming services allow. Even the FX-8350 was being promoted as a decent CPU for gamers wanting to stream because the extra cores at the low price made streaming an easier endeavor with that CPU than the equivalently priced intel CPU.

Maybe you didn't watch the stream, but Lisa Su referred to a PC running an 1800x+Vega gpu as the "dream gaming PC for 2017".

 

But that aside, it still wasn't promoted as just a gaming+streaming cpu, but it was also heavily promoted as a gaming cpu.

[Wolther]

12 minutes ago, HalGameGuru said:

People seem to be conflating "good at gaming" with "the BEST at gaming" the r7 series is GOOD at gaming. It is NOT the BEST. It is competitive with similar CPU's and offers strengths and weaknesses in different areas from them. You can game just fine on them. And if you wish to stream, the primary gaming use case for an 8 core cpu, you have a leg up with the cores needed to push higher quality streams through the meager bitrates streaming services allow. Even the FX-8350 was being promoted as a decent CPU for gamers wanting to stream because the extra cores at the low price made streaming an easier endeavor with that CPU than the equivalently priced intel CPU.

sure. But how many people actually stream, video edit or even record their plays. 

Most gamers play on single threaded games (competitive e-sports), and in that case AMD's current cpus are worse at compared to Intel's offerings

[TroubleKlef]

14 hours ago, Praesi said:

Funny. People jump on a comment i made, but im the one who try anything. I dont need your persmission btw. I say what i want, when i want, where i want. Got it? There is  a Console Section btw. Carry your SJW BS there.

Grow up.

[cj09beira]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

Maybe you didn't watch the stream, but Lisa Su referred to a PC running an 1800x+Vega gpu as the "dream gaming PC for 2017".

 

But that aside, it still wasn't promoted as just a gaming+streaming cpu, but it was also heavily promoted as a gaming cpu.

but they were not lying a ryzen + vega in 1440-2160p would be a good gaming machine, what we are seeing at 1080p is temporary problems that should be ironed out soon

[Praesi]

2 minutes ago, TroubleKlef said:

Grow up.

*yawn*

[79wjd]

8 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

but they were not lying a ryzen + vega in 1440-2160p would be a good gaming machine, what we are seeing at 1080p is temporary problems that should be ironed out soon

What we're seeing at 1080p we will see in the next few years at 1440p and then 4k as GPUs get more powerful and the bottleneck switches back to the CPU. And they were "lying" being intentionally misleading, "dream gaming PC" implies the best you can get, which an 1800x+Vega is not.

[cj09beira]

1 minute ago, Wolther said:

sure. But how many people actually stream, video edit or even record their plays. 

Most gamers play on single threaded games (competitive e-sports), and in that case AMD's current cpus are worse at compared to Intel's offerings

true, but me for example i like to do multiple things at the same time, play games and watch youtube, and be on ltt forums, and have a bunch of tabs open, in those cases it would be better to have more cores, and i don't remember amd talking about e-sports games, like cs, unless you count dota 2, 

we always known that ryzen would not be the best option for gaming just because of the fact that kaby lake is reaching 5ghz, 

why are sintetic benchmarks not being too affected? probably because if you think about it most don't have much talk between cores ( cinebench, blender ect) which means that even if the scheduler doesn't use the threads well, it doesn't matter much because they are very independent tasks, while on gaming the tasks depend a lot on each other.

[typographie]

15 hours ago, TechGod said:

This should hopefully make some people think its as bad as Bulldozer reconsider their thinking.

Anyone who thinks Ryzen is as bad as Bulldozer is already ignoring evidence, so I wouldn't plan on further evidence changing their minds. Ryzen suffers from some frustratingly familiar problems, but it's already a more competitive product than Bulldozer.

[cj09beira]

2 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

What we're seeing at 1080p we will see in the next few years at 1440p and then 4k as GPUs get more powerful and the bottleneck switches back to the CPU. And they were "lying", "dream gaming PC" implies the best you can get, which an 1800x+Vega is not.

did you read my post untill the end? i guess not :-|

[79wjd]

2 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

did you read my post untill the end? i guess not :-|

I did, and it's not just a temporary problem. Yes, there is a temporary problem with games (at least I'm assuming it'll only be temporary), but even if that's fixed it won't be able to keep up with a 7700k due to a lower IPC and clockspeed deficiencies.

[Wolther]

1 minute ago, cj09beira said:

true, but me for example i like to do multiple things at the same time, play games and watch youtube, and be on ltt forums, and have a bunch of tabs open, in those cases it would be better to have more cores

Okay, but those extra tasks don't require 8 cores

 

2 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

 i don't remember amd talking about e-sports games, like cs, unless you count dota 2, 

 

 e-sports are games right? Yeah.. Usually when you say stuff that hypes up gaming you mean to include all games. 

 

4 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

 

we always known that ryzen would not be the best option for gaming just because of the fact that kaby lake is reaching 5ghz, 

why are sintetic benchmarks not being too affected? probably because if you think about it most don't have much talk between cores ( cinebench, blender ect) which means that even if the scheduler doesn't use the threads well, it doesn't matter much because they are very independent tasks, while on gaming the tasks depend a lot on each other.

Right, so if kabylake is better then why go for ryzen if you're a gamer. 

They delivered an incomplete product and that's not how you get people to swap from intel to amd. I guess we'll see how things go from here though. 

[cj09beira]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

I did, and it's not just a temporary problem. Yes, there is a temporary problem with games (at least I'm assuming it'll only be temporary), but even if that's fixed it won't be able to keep up with a 7700k due to a lower IPC and clockspeed deficiencies.

that was always a given, but as games start using more cores it will maybe even surpass it 

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

that was always a given, but as games start using more cores it will maybe even surpass it 

That is a possibility, but it's also just as likely that things don't change. The fact of the matter is that AMD promoted Ryzen is an amazing gaming CPU when it's not. It's great at workstation loads and streaming, but for pure gaming there are better choices for less money.

[cj09beira]

1 minute ago, Wolther said:

Okay, but those extra tasks don't require 8 cores

 

 e-sports are games right? Yeah.. Usually when you say stuff that hypes up gaming you mean to include all games. 

 

Right, so if kabylake is better then why go for ryzen if you're a gamer. 

They delivered an incomplete product and that's not how you get people to swap from intel to amd. I guess we'll see how things go from here though. 

if you are gaming and doing a bunch of other stuff a 4 core wont be enough,

e-sports are a niche in the market where really high fps are needed most gamers don't need fps that high, if you need them then go ahead and by a kaby lake system, as we all know that those e-sport games are very poorly threaded,

ryzen is for those who need more cores than the normal gamers, they didnt release a incomplete product they released a product too soon

 

[cj09beira]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

That is a possibility, but it's also just as likely that things don't change. The fact of the matter is that AMD promoted Ryzen is an amazing gaming CPU when it's not. It's great at workstation loads and streaming, but for pure gaming there are better choices for less money.

i do believe it will reach parity with broadwell-e when ms fix their scheduler, 

although if all you do is gaming then go get a kaby lake,

[Wolther]

3 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

if you are gaming and doing a bunch of other stuff a 4 core wont be enough,

 

 

I guess I can agree with that point if you really really need it. 

 

5 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

 

e-sports are a niche in the market where really high fps are needed most gamers don't need fps that high, if you need them then go ahead and by a kaby lake system, as we all know that those e-sport games are very poorly threaded,

ryzen is for those who need more cores than the normal gamers, they didnt release a incomplete product they released a product too soon

 

e-sports isn't the only thing that requires high fps, that was just one example anyways. Some people go for the 144hz route rather than the 2k/4k route. I might be mistaken but I'm not sure if ryzen can do AAA at 144hz. This is a high end chip after-all. 

Your last line.. idek man. When you release something too soon that indicates it's incomplete. 

[cj09beira]

6 minutes ago, Wolther said:

I guess I can agree with that point if you really really need it. 

 

e-sports isn't the only thing that requires high fps, that was just one example anyways. Some people go for the 144hz route rather than the 2k/4k route. I might be mistaken but I'm not sure if ryzen can do AAA at 144hz. This is a high end chip after-all. 

Your last line.. idek man. When you release something too soon that indicates it's incomplete. 

from their side it was complete its 3rd parties that have stuff to do still

edit: from what i have see ryzen can deliver in the current state at least 120ish frames so its not that bad, after 120  the diference is small

[79wjd]

2 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

from their side it was complete its 3rd parties that have stuff to do still

Well, you could argue that AMD rushed the release and as a result didn't give board manufacturers (or Microsoft) the information they required in a timely manner.