Why ryzen is better than coffe lake

[Robert IT]

I know ,I know coffee lake is best at gaming and tie at editing but AMD promises that they will have new prosesors for AM4 soket for at least 3-4 years that means you can get high end prosesor in 2021 without geting a new mothet board and also ryzen is cheper and overclockble without a premium edition .So Ryzen is the long therm smart choise and intel is like who has money to spend trowith to us

[Majestic]

Did this really require a seperate post for it?

[xsimplyjosh]

The truth is you dont upgrade your freaking processor every year or two its not wise financially in the long run. These stuff are made to last long like at least a solid 5 years. Manage to last with a i5 3550 for 6 years or less before i decided to go with a 7700k. So idk why people are thinking about this “support”.

[Simon771]

If CPU from 2021 will acctually work on AM4 motherboards that are released today, I can already assume that performance increase won't be worth it.

That also means that you won't get any new features for 4 years ... features like next gen M.2, thunderbolt, usb 4.0 or whatever comes next, PCI-e 4.0 etc.

 

I can't argue about budget and price/performance ratio, but that's about it when it comes to AMD.

[Misanthrope]

2020 or 2021 is a bit long into the future I agree.

 

But I can see myself dropping a Ryzen 2 (not refresh) chip on 2019 (supposedly when those come out) Since it will be a smaller node so you'll probably will get more cores, better clocks and a modest bump in IPC (though I'm skeptical of that last part)

 

And yes it means my motherboard would lack many newer features but I've got pci-e slots free those can be handy to drop in cards for newer protocols I might want. 

 

So yeah most people assume this is not a valid argument about long term mobo support but as someone who really hates upgrading motherboards and reinstalling the OS it suits me fine.

[Robert IT]

2 minutes ago, xsimplyjosh said:

The truth is you dont upgrade your freaking processor every year or two its not wise financially in the long run. These stuff are made to last long like at least a solid 5 years. Manage to last with a i5 3550 for 6 years or less before i decided to go with a 7700k. So idk why people are thinking about this “support”.

Yes you dont upgrade very year but who khows what procesor heavy programs or games will apear and if like me you are on a buget pc and you need to upgrade as fast as posible as cheap as posible and as much performance as posible and without changing motherboard saving money

[TheOriginalHero]

15 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Did this really require a seperate post for it?

No. No it did not.

[xsimplyjosh]

Just now, Robert IT said:

Yes you dont upgrade very year but who khows what procesor heavy programs or games will apear and if like me you are on a buget pc and you need to upgrade as fast as posible as cheap as posible and as much performance as posible and without changing motherboard saving money

If you are doing that then somethings really wrong already... tell me what programs are you even using? Are u making video content at least?

 

Even my system will last a good 7-8 years at least before i really have to change anything if at most. Ive done it before with a crappy 1k aud system for at least 6 years and thats pretty good. because as far as i know it unless you are a content creator where you are cashing in tons of money comments like this irks me because i dont see the point really if you want to be on a budget u dont simply keep upgrading every year or two. Not that my i5 3550 is obsolete or busted or damaged after 6 years of use i still run it for my parents as a media station.

[Misanthrope]

6 minutes ago, xsimplyjosh said:

If you are doing that then somethings really wrong already

Yes because all people can see 7 or 8 years into the future and know exactly what kind of programs and things they will be doing and plan for that 

[xsimplyjosh]

Not that im trying to be harsh but imo doesnt make sense to change quickly... its not like the performance jump is +100% or smt then maybe

[xsimplyjosh]

Just now, Misanthrope said:

Yes because all people can see 7 or 8 years into the future and know exactly what kind of programs and things they will be doing and plan for that 

Of course. If you know what you are going to do then you will have a solid idea of what your system will be like.

 

mwhere did i say everyone must build a system for 7-8 years duration? I said mine only.

[paddy-stone]

OP, I'm sorry but your statement is flawed anyway, as "better" is subjective and based on use case.

 

I do agree somewhat with the motherboard argument though, but really only applies to people that have a lower tier CPU in it ATM, so they can upgrade to newer/better CPUs as and when they have the money. New features may be able to be added to AM4 boards that come out in the years to come too I believe.. not entirely positive about that, but think it should be do-able. They could however bring out AM4+ or something with different chipsets etc I believe, that would use the same socket design. Again, this is just my theory and opinion.

[cj09beira]

2 minutes ago, xsimplyjosh said:

Not that im trying to be harsh but imo doesnt make sense to change quickly... its not like the performance jump is +100% or smt then maybe

will probably be over 50%, as the next ryzen will probably have 12 cores (assuming epyc will still use 4 dies), plus ipc improvements+ higher clocks 

[Robert IT]

7 minutes ago, xsimplyjosh said:

If you are doing that then somethings really wrong already... tell me what programs are you even using? Are u making video content at least?

 

Even my system will last a good 7-8 years at least before i really have to change anything if at most. Ive done it before with a crappy 1k aud system for at least 6 years and thats pretty good. because as far as i know it unless you are a content creator where you are cashing in tons of money comments like this irks me because i dont see the point really if you want to be on a budget u dont simply keep upgrading every year or two. Not that my i5 3550 is obsolete or busted or damaged after 6 years of use i still run it for my parents as a media station.

Ok you buil you pc as you want i build my pc as i want im just making conversation to see how other think i dont want to trigger you dont take it that seriousli ok?

[Billy_Mays]

Because it’s available right now without purchasing a stupidly priced CPU that’s delided and stuff

[cj09beira]

1 minute ago, paddy-stone said:

OP, I'm sorry but your statement is flawed anyway, as "better" is subjective and based on use case.

 

I do agree somewhat with the motherboard argument though, but really only applies to people that have a lower tier CPU in it ATM, so they can upgrade to newer/better CPUs as and when they have the money. New features may be able to be added to AM4 boards that come out in the years to come too I believe.. not entirely positive about that, but think it should be do-able. They could however bring out AM4+ or something with different chipsets etc I believe, that would use the same socket design. Again, this is just my theory and opinion.

there isn't any new feature that would be a deal breaker coming anytime soon

[paddy-stone]

3 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

there isn't any new feature that would be a deal breaker coming anytime soon

Yeah, I agree. I have a B350 board ATM, and am entirely happy with it TBH.. newer GPUs even if they use Pci-e 4.0 won't use anywhere near the bandwidth, not for a year or 2 anyway, it's unlikely they will even get to max out pci-e 3.0 IMO. Thunderbolt is too rigid and expensive, another USB iteration should move past that level of performance anyway IIRC, and have some other great features. We are unlikely to see any major differences on mobos for the next few years IMO, unless they start having mini-SAS on board for the desktop mobos, that is the one area I would like to see advances, for storage and networking.

[cj09beira]

@paddy-stone i think the best thing to do right now would be to get a good am4 board, get a 1600/1700 and then when ryzen 2 is available and you feel the need to upgrade, you have a great upgrade path with up to 12 core chips on the same board, by then with some huge perf gains, 

[xsimplyjosh]

23 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

will probably be over 50%, as the next ryzen will probably have 12 cores (assuming epyc will still use 4 dies), plus ipc improvements+ higher clocks 

If its amilestone jump at same pricing then maybe yes worth the instant jump but then with cpu getting near the thin end of nm scale we all want to ask the question how much more can it go up by.

 

i know intel is kinda dogging it by not going mainstream 8core but i guess it still wanna retain the clocking king 

[cj09beira]

1 minute ago, xsimplyjosh said:

If its amilestone jump at same pricing then maybe yes worth the instant jump but then with cpu getting near the thin end of nm scale we all want to ask the question how much more can it go up by.

 

i know intel is kinda dogging it by not going mainstream 8core but i guess it still wanna retain the clocking king 

the thing is that, ryzen is the first gen meaning they probably already know where they can change and improve for better perf, while intel is in there 6-7 gen arch meaning for them improving ipc will be hard, and then 7nm from goflo will have a 5ghz target vs the 3ghz target of 14nm lpp, so i expect amd to catch up with intel in terms of clock speeds really quickly and still offering more cores per dollar, and the future is more cores, not more clocks

[xsimplyjosh]

Just now, cj09beira said:

the thing is that, ryzen is the first gen meaning they probably already know where they can change and improve for better perf, while intel is in there 6-7 gen arch meaning for them improving ipc will be hard, and then 7nm from goflo will have a 5ghz target vs the 3ghz target of 14nm lpp, so i expect amd to catch up with intel in terms of clock speeds really quickly and still offering more cores per dollar, and the future is more cores, not more clocks

Yea im hoping ryzen can up the clocks now to get it a more attractive option. Even at 4.5ghz should be plenty for most at an oc level with that many cores.  heck sometimes i run my 7700k at stock/turbo speeds only and seem to be fine with nil issues. I do the oc occasionally but not on a 24/7 basis. Only when i feel it asks for it like productive tasks, barely notice much diff in gaming stock or oc since 1440p is quite intense for a middleground res

[cj09beira]

Just now, xsimplyjosh said:

Yea im hoping ryzen can up the clocks now to get it a more attractive option. Even at 4.5ghz should be plenty for most at an oc level with that many cores.  heck sometimes i run my 7700k at stock/turbo speeds only and seem to be fine with nil issues. I do the oc occasionally but not on a 24/7 basis. Only when i feel it asks for it like productive tasks, barely notice much diff in gaming stock or oc since 1440p is quite intense for a middleground res

at higher resolutions cpus make almost no difference, we will probably see 4.4-4.5 as golden sample territory for ryzen+ and then higher than that for ryzen 2

[System Error Message]

for those arguing about new CPU, new platform for new features when you upgrade, in the past AMD released new chipsets/sockets for new features while being backward compatible with older boards. This allowed you to upgrade whichever you needed first that you could afford. many simply think this is about upgrading a new CPU while keeping the same board but thats not what this is about. AMD's compatibility is mainly about upgrading either the board or CPU only when you are short on cash to whichever happens to be what you need at the time. Essentially AMD is giving you a better option in terms of budget, upgrade everything or partial upgrades on needs.

 

So even if AMD comes out with a new platform, its a question on what you need first, be it a new board with same CPU if you need the features more or a new CPU first if computing power is what you need when you have a limited budget. This isnt about the boards currently out being outdated in 5 years, its about being able to match different things together so you dont have to fork out more cash everytime you upgrade and being able to reuse your older board if you dont require the features of the new one, or getting a new board to use with an older CPU if the features are what you need more.

 

AMD is actually very clever in their plans, quite often people tend to miss it (again a scottish youtuber pointed it out in AMD vs nvidia and AMD vs intel where even when AMD clearly beat nvidia they still didnt manage to get the marketshare that they needed/deserved to continue making good products). Nvidia and intel's marketing is clearly better than AMD's.

[paddy-stone]

37 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

@paddy-stone i think the best thing to do right now would be to get a good am4 board, get a 1600/1700 and then when ryzen 2 is available and you feel the need to upgrade, you have a great upgrade path with up to 12 core chips on the same board, by then with some huge perf gains, 

I already have a board and a 1700, I have loads of PCs and servers and such, thanks anyway though, lol

 

[cj09beira]

1 minute ago, paddy-stone said:

I already have a board and a 1700, I have loads of PCs and servers and such, thanks anyway though, lol

 

i meant it as a general what should people do kind of thing  

i am planing to get the ryzen+ version of the 1700