AMD Ryzen "Quad-Core" Config Tested vs i7-7700k

[The Sloth]

1 minute ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

You missed the point  I meant that X99 had stability issues, however, performance hasn't changed. Just like Ryzen, it has stability issues and performance will probably not change.

 

Ryzen is a new cpu, it has bad optimization. remember the rx 480 at launch vs now. 

[2FA]

1 minute ago, Memories4K said:

Well nobody else is talking frame-times because that's not what we're comparing, i like the frame-times on Ryzen though

Except it's just as important as a metric.

[pradhyumn rathod]

2 minutes ago, Dietrichw said:

Thread derailed instantly..... All it is about is a four core config  test of the 1800x and yet people argue over the results of the eight core config which aren't even mentioned. 

EXACTLY 

 

[PCGuy_5960]

9 hours ago, nerdslayer1 said:

.... day 1 x99 had so many problems, i would say now its better. more games are taking advantage of multicore CPUs, testing with 720p lowest setting is also a real world senerio i see most people with titan x sli or gtx 1080 sli take part in.  

 

9 hours ago, nerdslayer1 said:

Ryzen is a new cpu, it has bad optimization. remember the rx 480 at launch vs now. 

9 hours ago, DeadEyePsycho said:

While I'm saying it will be a huge change, many game devs have said they have optimization patches in the work that give very good boosts.

AMD had the EXACT same argument with Bulldozer and well... We know how that went.... Don't bank on developers optimizing for Ryzen...

[The Sloth]

9 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

 

 

Not signed in

yes, that's the point, it depends on the game and real world scenario. most people won't play at the lowest setting with a high-end sli setup. 

 

9 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

AMD had the EXACT same argument with Bulldozer and well... We know how that went.... Don't bank on developers optimizing for Ryzen...

Bulldozer has shit IPC while ryzen has really good single and multithread performance. 

[Memories4K]

1 minute ago, nerdslayer1 said:

Ryzen is a new cpu, it has bad optimization. remember the rx 480 at launch vs now. 

RX 480 is definitely better but i'm not so sure that translates the same to CPUs

1 minute ago, DeadEyePsycho said:

Except it's just as important as a metric.

Yeah i think it is important too but you misunderstand; that's not what we're comparing when somebody brings up an "i5 in gaming"

You're not making a real case that Ryzen's in any way going to perform better than an i5 in gaming, you're just making a case that Ryzen will perform more reliably due to tighter frame-times

[AnonymousGuy]

3 minutes ago, nerdslayer1 said:

Bulldozer has shit IPC while ryzen has really good single and multithread performance. 

And by really good you mean 50% worse than Intel when the poor overclocking and inferior IPC are taken into account?

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, nerdslayer1 said:

yes, that's the point, it depends on the game and real world scenario. most people won't play at the lowest setting with a high-end sli setup. 

But what will happen when Nvidia's Volta launches? The GTX 2080 Ti (or however they decide to call it) will be 2x more powerful than the GTX 1080, so Ryzen will struggle to keep up at 1440p, just like it struggles right now at 1080p...

[The Sloth]

Just now, AnonymousGuy said:

And by really good you mean 50% worse than Intel when the poor overclocking and inferior IPC are taken into account?

i know you are a troll so i will just ignore you 

[WMGroomAK]

9 minutes ago, Memories4K said:

I've heard great things about Ryzen being "smoother" (better frametimes for sure, which is rad) but that doesn't change anything about the frame-rate that's comparable to the i5.

 

9 minutes ago, DeadEyePsycho said:

I wasn't talking FPS, I was talking frame times which is arguably more important for smoother gameplay.

Off topic from original thread, but Tech Report in their reviews did a discussion about FPS vs Frame Times and why they look at Frame Times more than FPS figures. (http://techreport.com/review/31546/where-minimum-fps-figures-mislead-frame-time-analysis-shines)

 

Back on topic, I was waiting for someone to take an 8-core Ryzen and begin emulating the 6-core models by disabling cores.  The one problem I can think of in this scenario is when you are trying to emulate the 4-core Ryzen by just disabling 4-cores, you're forgetting that the production 4-core chips will be a single CCX and not the dual CCX and therefore the emulated chip is going to have twice as much L3 cache.  Although with some of the L3 latency issues that they've had across CCX, that might be a moot point.

[The Sloth]

1 minute ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

But what will happen when Nvidia's Volta launches? The GTX 2080 Ti (or however they decide to call it) will be 2x more powerful than the GTX 1080, so Ryzen will struggle to keep up at 1440p, just like it struggles right now at 1080p...

 

.....no, if you max out all gfx and use 1440p it will be fine also 4k is looking good. 

[PCGuy_5960]

4 minutes ago, nerdslayer1 said:

Bulldozer has shit IPC while ryzen has really good single and multithread performance. 

IPC is 12% lower than Kabylake and it clocks 25% lower than Kabylake or 12.5% lower than Haswell-E

[Memories4K]

3 minutes ago, nerdslayer1 said:

Bulldozer has shit IPC while ryzen has really good single and multithread performance. 

Yeah, Ryzen is much closer to Kabylake than Bulldozer was to Sandy Bridge.

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, nerdslayer1 said:

.....no, if you max out all gfx and use 1440p it will be fine also 4k is looking good. 

Yes. Here is a good idea! Cap your FPS at 30, so that you have no issues whatsoever! Using max settings to get lower FPS doesn't solve anything, just FYI...

[AnonymousGuy]

Just now, nerdslayer1 said:

i know you are a troll so i will just ignore you 

I know math probably hurts your brain, but a 5Ghz 7700K (which is an average overclock) that's 25% better IPC means an 1800X would have to clock to 6.25Ghz to compete single thread.  Since 4Ghz is where it tops out, 6.25/4 = 56% better IPC at overclock.

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, Memories4K said:

Yeah, Ryzen is much closer to Haswell than Bulldozer was to Sandy Bridge.

FIFY

[The Sloth]

Just now, AnonymousGuy said:

I know math probably hurts your brain, but a 5Ghz 7700K (which is an average overclock) that's 25% better IPC means an 1800X would have to clock to 6.25Ghz to compete single thread.  Since 4Ghz is where it tops out, 6.25/4 = 56% better IPC at overclock.

 

you really are a bad troll

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, AnonymousGuy said:

I know math probably hurts your brain, but a 5Ghz 7700K (which is an average overclock) that's 25% better IPC means an 1800X would have to clock to 6.25Ghz to compete single thread.  Since 4Ghz is where it tops out, 6.25/4 = 56% better IPC at overclock.

IPC doesn't increase. Single core performance though, does....

[Guest Kloaked]

17 minutes ago, Memories4K said:

Pretty much most benchmarks had it around the performance of a 7600k/6600k.
So if it's not on par with an i7, well you can bet the next best thing is an i5,
I don't know how Ryzen has changed since launch, hopefully for the better, but i'm not going to argue against the fact that when it comes to gaming that Ryzen's performance has been most marked at the i5 level.

I've heard great things about Ryzen being "smoother" (better frametimes for sure, which is rad) but that doesn't change anything about the frame-rate that's comparable to the i5.

Not to mention everything Ryzen currently does, a current i7 does it better.

[The Sloth]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

IPC doesn't increase. Single core performance though, does....

i believe he is trolling, really bad at his job. 

[Memories4K]

6 minutes ago, nerdslayer1 said:

yes, that's the point, it depends on the game and real world scenario. most people won't play at the lowest setting with a high-end sli setup. 

I mean most people play with integrated graphics, there's a reason benchmarking is a thing that doesn't follow "most people's" rigs; i want to reliably compare one CPU to another, not get memed on my purchase because a reviewer showed 4K benchmarks stating that my 1070 will perform the same regardless of x CPU or Y CPU or Z CPU. Benchmarks @1080p with a 1080ti are in fact reliable and meant to show the differences; what if i want to upgrade my GPU? What if i want to game at high-refresh rates? What if i want the better value that will last a little bit longer?

[The Sloth]

Just now, Kloaked said:

Not to mention everything Ryzen currently does, a current i7 does it better.

so a 7700k can beat ryzen 1700 in creative work? 

[PCGuy_5960]

9 hours ago, nerdslayer1 said:

i believe he is trolling, really bad at his job. 

He is not trolling... Many people confuse IPC with single core performance.

9 hours ago, nerdslayer1 said:

so a 7700k can beat ryzen 1700 in creative work? 

In Adobe. YEPPPP

[Guest Kloaked]

Just now, nerdslayer1 said:

so a 7700k can beat ryzen 1700 in creative work? 

For gaming. Ryzen is an okay inbetween for "work and gaming", but I would still buy an i7 over it as it sits right now.

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, Memories4K said:

What if i want the better value that will last a little bit longer?

Well, you don't buy a CPU only to replace it after 2 years because it doesn't perform well in games anymore...