Was it a mistake for me to choose Ryzen? Return and swap to 8700K?

[Dav!d]

Not quite sure how to ask this... I recently build my new R7 1700X / X370-F system.

I had quite a lot of trouble with it in the beginning but now it's running fine at 3.88GHz. My Trident Z 3200MHz kit runs at 3000MHz.

 

AMD RYZEN R7 1700X @3.6GHz
ASUS Strix X370-F
ASUS Strix GTX 1070
G.Skill TridentZ 3200MHz 16GB Dual Channel @3000MHz
Corsair RM750i
DeepCool Captain 240EX RGB
Phanteks Enthoo Evolv TG ATX Black
Samsung 960 Evo 500GB M.2 NVME
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB 2.5" SATA
WD Black 4000GB

WD Red   4000GB

BenQ Zowie XL2735

 

All I really do is gaming at 1440P, 144Hz.

 

Dirty Bomb, Quake Live, TOXIKK, Reflex Arena and Quake Champions. 

I also started playing Tomb Raider 2013 and Doom 2016... yesterday.

 

Quake Live obviously runs at it's maximum FPS (250), Dirty Bomb often does too (180) but drops into the 140s and possibly a tiny bit lower than that. Reflex and TOXIKK are also solid. Although, I think that TOXIKKs performance is pretty GPU bound, not sure. I often droops into the 110s. Raising or lowering graphical settings has a massive effect.

Quake Champions' FPS is all over the fucking place, 190-110. mostly in the 160s but it really does drip down into the 120s somewhat often. 110s are rare but present.

 

By the way, QC is going to get Vulcan support, just in case that that's valuable information...

Apart from that I also play quite a lot on Dolphin and Cemu, highly single core performance dependant emulators. They run perfectly fine unless I crank up the graphics. I am absolutely not sure what's causing stutter at higher resolutions and enhancements, since they are emulators I'd not be surprised if it was the CPU and not the GPU.

 

I'm not sure if I will play much of anything else anytime soon.

 

None of this utilizes anywhere near enough threads for Ryzen to have made sense.

 

You might be wondering why I actually went with Ryzen in the first place. I simply have not been following along with the new Intel launches after the X299 stuff. I wasn't aware of the 8700K... And 4 cores on the 7700K can go fuck themselves  

 

Didn't do too much research at the time of buying. I mean, I already knew what I wanted just a few months back. So I went with that.

 

Since I don't have much of any use for more than 6 cores and want decently high framerates, should I return my MoBo and CPU for the Intel counterparts? It would be 70€ more, not a problem.

 

Motherboard would be the Z370-F (would looove the Z370-E for the WiFi but Silver.... Nah ).

Two M.2 slots would be awesome. Especially now that they both support PCI-E 3.0 x4. 

 

One of the things that is making me really unsure also is the unbelievably pathetic rear I/O on that board compared to the X370-F. I wish they would not put a fucking DVI port there instead of some more Type A USB ports. I mean, how many connectors for the integrated graphics would anyone ever need on a gaming motherboard? Exactly, none.

 

So from a pure convenience point of view staying on Ryzen would be nice. But it's still not enough of a reason to sacrifice a whole lot of performance, though...

 

I actually am really conflicted and I would love some input from others.

 

By the way, my system looks absolutely beautiful. Just thought I'd throw that in here  

 

But damn, Asus Aura is suuuper limited. Can't even save different profiles and have them load up when I open a certain game. My mouse and keyboard turn red when opening Quake, I expected to be able to have the PC do the same with Aura... But nope...  It's actually ridiculous.

 

 

Help is greatly appreciated.

[Lewellyn]

Maintaining high framerates for 120 or 144hz is a realm for strong single thread performance. If that's your goal then it's probably a good idea. Unless I'm misinformed.

[Canada EH]

 

[dizmo]

You'd need a new motherboard as well...I don't think you can really return stuff simply because you don't like it, can you?

I'd maybe consider going with the 8600k. I don't think you get that much of an advantage with the 8700k.

 

As for your issues, have up updated the BIOS?

 

[Dav!d]

6 minutes ago, dizmo said:

You'd need a new motherboard as well...I don't think you can really return stuff simply because you don't like it, can you?

I'd maybe consider going with the 8600k. I don't think you get that much of an advantage with the 8700k.

 

As for your issues, have up updated the BIOS?

 

It's a very recent build, I can return stuff just like that within a short period of time. Also, I have very much mentioned which new motherboard I would be getting  

 

Ryzen system runs fine now, by the way. It had issues, though.

[GDRRiley]

I would maybe return the cpu and get a new ryzen+ cpu. 

[Dav!d]

33 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

I would maybe return the cpu and get a new ryzen+ cpu. 

That would mean that I'd not have a system until april  

 

56 minutes ago, ThatGuyWhoTwirlsHisPen said:

Maintaining high framerates for 120 or 144hz is a realm for strong single thread performance. If that's your goal then it's probably a good idea. Unless I'm misinformed.

Yeah, I guess I should really side grade then...

 

 

[Jurrunio]

I think your problem lies on the graphics card. Tweaking the graphics giving far more frames is a symptom of GPU bottleneck.

[Streetguru]

 

 

42 minutes ago, Dav!d said:

But it's still not enough of a reason to sacrifice a whole lot of performance, though...

On average Ryzen isn't going to be that much slower than an 8700k, especially at 1440p with a GTX 1070, the difference between Ryzen and Coffee Lake are only going to really show in CPU bound tests like this one at 720p, or with a 1080ti at 1080p.

If you're maxing out graphical settings the 1070 is likely your bottleneck, run your games at the lowest possible settings to see what your max fps will be when you're CPU bound.
 

 

 

[Ordinarily_Greater]

9 minutes ago, Dav!d said:

That would mean that I'd not have a system until april  

so why don't you just keep it and deal with the Zen Issues? at least until April

[Dav!d]

25 minutes ago, Ordinarily_Greater said:

so why don't you just keep it and deal with the Zen Issues? at least until April

I don't really have issues, it's more about whether the Intel platform is worth it more.

[Shiftstealth]

35 minutes ago, Dav!d said:

That would mean that I'd not have a system until april  

 

Yeah, I guess I should really side grade then...

 

 

 

 

I would really stick it out until April of 2019. Ryzen 2 will be here then, and should be a drop in upgrade for your board. Ryzen 2 is looking like it is going to have 3 CCX's on it since the server chips are quoted as being 48 Core. To get 48 Cores on an MCM like that they'd need to run 4 Chips with 12 cores each. Ala 12 Cores.

 

I'm sure you're like, but wait i need fast single core performance! The 7nm process that Ryzen 2 will run on is quoted to run at up to 5Ghz. So you'll get your single core, but you'll have to wait a year.

 

 

[Dav!d]

Just now, Shiftstealth said:

 

 

I would really stick it out until April of 2019. Ryzen 2 will be here then, and should be a drop in upgrade for your board. Ryzen 2 is looking like it is going to have 3 CCX's on it since the server chips are quoted as being 48 Core. To get 48 Cores on an MCM like that they'd need to run 4 Chips with 12 cores each. Ala 12 Cores.

 

I'm sure you're like, but wait i need fast single core performance! The 7nm process that Ryzen 2 will run on is quoted to run at up to 5Ghz. So you'll get your single core, but you'll have to wait a year.

 

 

Now that's something that makes me not regret my decision  Yeah, that's pretty awesome and definitely acceptable!

 

At that point I would then just give the 1700X to my sister for whom I'm gonna build a R5 1600 Zen+ equivalent system soon  

 

Thanks man!

[Shiftstealth]

Just now, Dav!d said:

Now that's something that makes me not regret my decision  Yeah, that's pretty awesome and definitely acceptable!

 

At that point I would then just give the 1700X to my sister for whom I'm gonna build a R5 1600 Zen+ equivalent system soon  

 

Thanks man!

Yep. It kept me where i am too. To expound on that the 3800X will probably be a 12 core 24 thread beast, fit in the AM4 (1331) Socket, and probably boost up to 4.6-4.7 (I don't expect it to be clocked at 5Ghz out of the box) And like the Ryzen 2200G, and 2400G, It should only require a BIOS upgrade on your current board to use. Your power delivery on your board should already be sufficient since when going to 7nm 12 cores will probably use the same amount of power as the 14nm now.  All of this data are just educated guesses based on AMD's slides showing The new Epyc chip at 48 Cores 96 Threads in a meeting, and that 7nm slide. The 7nm from Global Foundries is said to be on time as they have other chip developers that want to use their process since Global Foundries will be the first 7nm High power node. Global Foundries is on time with their node because they are sticking to DUV for most of their 7nm process, and only utilizing the EUV process on layers of the chip that have been perfected. 

[Ordinarily_Greater]

39 minutes ago, Dav!d said:

I don't really have issues, it's more about whether the Intel platform is worth it more.

that is a great question, but it comes down if you are truly multitasking which that last bit is a workload for Ryzen for the cheap

[Dav!d]

21 hours ago, Streetguru said:

 

 

On average Ryzen isn't going to be that much slower than an 8700k, especially at 1440p with a GTX 1070, the difference between Ryzen and Coffee Lake are only going to really show in CPU bound tests like this one at 720p, or with a 1080ti at 1080p.

If you're maxing out graphical settings the 1070 is likely your bottleneck, run your games at the lowest possible settings to see what your max fps will be when you're CPU bound.
 

 

 

If I lower my settings the FPS will actually go through the roof and stay there. I know, this would generally mean that my CPU is more than enough for what I do but in benchmarks the CPU choice still seems to matter, even if they have such high FPS on low settings. I have lowered my settings accordingly obviously, I care more about the frames than the graphics. But I thought I'd post the performance of the highest settings, anyways.  

[xg32]

18 minutes ago, Dav!d said:

If I lower my settings the FPS will actually go through the roof and stay there. I know, this would generally mean that my CPU is more than enough for what I do but in benchmarks the CPU choice still seems to matter, even if they have such high FPS on low settings. I have lowered my settings accordingly obviously, I care more about the frames than the graphics. But I thought I'd post the performance of the highest settings, anyways.  

In cases like these it's better to lay out the facts and numbers so you can decide:

 

You are already regretting your NEW build being SLOW. You are not the only one as Ryzen has lower single thread performance and is in general less stable than intel without using the exact right parts. I personally had trouble justifying going from a 2600k to a ryzen. So I think you definitely should change something, at least the cpu.

 

I've seen  ryzen posts over the past week or 2, many of them used trident Z ram and asus-f (unless they were all by you)

 

Ryzen in general is 20% slower than 8600k/8700k on cpu bottlenecked situations. The number I use is 105 vs 130fps, on cpu intensive games that cannot use all threads (ACO, Kingdom Come, Shadow of War, there will be more in the future.

 

Intel's ready to move past 8700k/coffee lake due to meltdown, ice lake is right around the corner, you have a functional pc.

 

zen+ is rumored to have 4.3-4.5 oc, there's your possible cpu switch.

 

If zen+ falls short, you can always keep your ram and move to ice lake in a year. Personally I consider a 8core cpu+ a 4k/120hz capable video card to be good for the next 5 years.

[Dav!d]

1 hour ago, xg32 said:

In cases like these it's better to lay out the facts and numbers so you can decide:

 

You are already regretting your NEW build being SLOW. You are not the only one as Ryzen has lower single thread performance and is in general less stable than intel without using the exact right parts. I personally had trouble justifying going from a 2600k to a ryzen. So I think you definitely should change something, at least the cpu.

 

I've seen  ryzen posts over the past week or 2, many of them used trident Z ram and asus-f (unless they were all by you)

 

Ryzen in general is 20% slower than 8600k/8700k on cpu bottlenecked situations. The number I use is 105 vs 130fps, on cpu intensive games that cannot use all threads (ACO, Kingdom Come, Shadow of War, there will be more in the future.

 

Intel's ready to move past 8700k/coffee lake due to meltdown, ice lake is right around the corner, you have a functional pc.

 

zen+ is rumored to have 4.3-4.5 oc, there's your possible cpu switch.

 

If zen+ falls short, you can always keep your ram and move to ice lake in a year. Personally I consider a 8core cpu+ a 4k/120hz capable video card to be good for the next 5 years.

No! Not slow, just slower than I could get for a little more money. The question was if the 1700X and Ryzen platform are worth it over the Intel counterpart at all.

 

And yeah, I'm just going to see what newer Zen chips birng in terms of performance, after all the system does do what I need it to do very well so far.  

 

But better is always... better  

 

 

By the way, this is the video that gave me a bit of buyer's remorse: 

 

[Emberstone]

Honestly, if you're above 100+ fps in the games you like playing, I'd consider that pretty solid and nothing to really worry about. If you do want more performance, I'd rather wait for Ryzen+ in a few months to see if that offers anything significant for you over spending another $500 or so on an 8700K and a good motherboard (it's power hungry, get a nice board).

 

I had an R5-1600X overclocked to 4.0 GHz and ended up switching to an 8700K because I wasn't exactly having your same situation: my favorite games weren't well over 100 FPS, and overall not much better than my previous system. It wasn't because Ryzen was bad or anything, I think it was mostly just optimization issues or my favorite games being too single-thread focused (I'm looking at you, Guild Wars 2).

 

So yeah. You're still getting good use of your 144 Hz monitor, and at 1440p you're way more likely to be GPU-limited than CPU-limited. I think you've got a good setup for your needs, and if you need anything more, AM4 will offer better CPUs in the coming years.

 

As someone who bought Ryzen and switched, I think you're actually fine where you're at. Don't sweat it too much and enjoy the sweet system you've got.

[Ebony Falcon]

I have both haha, 1700x at 4ghz and a 8700k at 4.7 (delidding tomorow)

and really honestly 

don't bother man ryzen is asweome I ran mine with 2 1070's and they were always pegged at 99 percent usage at 1440p so ur gona be more than fine with 1 1070 man

 

u know this will be an unpopular opinion but I still find ryzen to be smoother for gaming too, there's just something going on with ryzen that is way more immersive 

there are no tiny stutter or anything that pull ur attention away 

and as great as the fps is with the 8700k 

ryzen is better for gaming as far as I'm concerned 

there is just something about it I can't explain 

 

[Dav!d]

On 2/19/2018 at 7:31 AM, Emberstone said:

Honestly, if you're above 100+ fps in the games you like playing, I'd consider that pretty solid and nothing to really worry about. If you do want more performance, I'd rather wait for Ryzen+ in a few months to see if that offers anything significant for you over spending another $500 or so on an 8700K and a good motherboard (it's power hungry, get a nice board).

 

I had an R5-1600X overclocked to 4.0 GHz and ended up switching to an 8700K because I wasn't exactly having your same situation: my favorite games weren't well over 100 FPS, and overall not much better than my previous system. It wasn't because Ryzen was bad or anything, I think it was mostly just optimization issues or my favorite games being too single-thread focused (I'm looking at you, Guild Wars 2).

 

So yeah. You're still getting good use of your 144 Hz monitor, and at 1440p you're way more likely to be GPU-limited than CPU-limited. I think you've got a good setup for your needs, and if you need anything more, AM4 will offer better CPUs in the coming years.

 

As someone who bought Ryzen and switched, I think you're actually fine where you're at. Don't sweat it too much and enjoy the sweet system you've got.

Wow, thanks a lot for that insight! Definitely made me rethink this

 

Quote

Don't sweat it too much and enjoy the sweet system you've got.

Thanks, I do and will!  I'm genuinely super happy about my system, runs and looks amazing!

[Dav!d]

On 2/20/2018 at 12:22 AM, Ebony Falcon said:

I have both haha, 1700x at 4ghz and a 8700k at 4.7 (delidding tomorow)

and really honestly 

don't bother man ryzen is asweome I ran mine with 2 1070's and they were always pegged at 99 percent usage at 1440p so ur gona be more than fine with 1 1070 man

 

u know this will be an unpopular opinion but I still find ryzen to be smoother for gaming too, there's just something going on with ryzen that is way more immersive 

there are no tiny stutter or anything that pull ur attention away 

and as great as the fps is with the 8700k 

ryzen is better for gaming as far as I'm concerned 

there is just something about it I can't explain 

 

Thanks man, this gave me quite the relief  

 

Especially 

Quote

u know this will be an unpopular opinion but I still find ryzen to be smoother for gaming too, there's just something going on with ryzen that is way more immersive 

there are no tiny stutter or anything that pull ur attention away 

I very much remember this being a thing with the 7700K, I assumed that the new platform didn't have these microstutter issues. If I had known that, I'd never even considered the Intel platform  

 

Quote

(delidding tomorow)

How did it work out? 

[Ebony Falcon]

17 hours ago, Dav!d said:

Thanks man, this gave me quite the relief  

 

Especially 

I very much remember this being a thing with the 7700K, I assumed that the new platform didn't have these microstutter issues. If I had known that, I'd never even considered the Intel platform  

 

How did it work out? 

Good I think ? Running 5ghz now and max temp for gaming is 62 and wider editing work load is 70, that's the most stressful thing I use my pc for so I'm happy 

[Dav!d]

On 2/22/2018 at 10:58 PM, Ebony Falcon said:

Good I think ? Running 5ghz now and max temp for gaming is 62 and wider editing work load is 70, that's the most stressful thing I use my pc for so I'm happy 

Wow, super nice!