AMD Ryzen 2 Review Mega Thread

[Castdeath97]

Can anyone give me a TL;DR / TL;DW?

[GOTSpectrum]

4 minutes ago, Castdeath97 said:

Can anyone give me a TL;DR / TL;DW?

They're a little bit better, little bit better price for performance but not worth the upgrade if you already have a ryzen CPU. Think of it like the RX400-RX500 upgrade but slightly better. 

[ImNotDeViLzzz]

WTB reviews with 4K gaming benchmarks.  Seeing them use a GTX 1080 Ti and these cpus and not doing 4K gaming benchmarks is ridiculous. So far all I have seen is reviews with 1080p and 1440p gaming.

[The Benjamins]

6 minutes ago, Castdeath97 said:

Can anyone give me a TL;DR / TL;DW?

200-400Mhz high clocks, way better Turbo boost, 4.3Ghz max OC, no need to OC for the X CPU's, better cache latency, higher FPS in games (10%), all CPUs come with coolers now. 

[GOTSpectrum]

Just now, The Benjamins said:

200-400Mhz high clocks, way better Turbo boost, 4.3Ghz max OC, no need to OC for the X CPU's, better cache latency, higher FPS in games (10%), all CPUs come with coolers now. 

Have to say, you're much better at TL;DR than I! 

[AnonymousGuy]

13 minutes ago, Castdeath97 said:

Can anyone give me a TL;DR / TL;DW?

Were you looking to buy Ryzen 1?  Then buy Ryzen 2.  Were you planning on buying an 8700K? Ryzen 2 isn't doing anything to convince you to not buy that.

[ravenshrike]

3 minutes ago, AnonymousGuy said:

Were you looking to buy Ryzen 1?  Then buy Ryzen 2.  Were you planning on buying an 8700K? Ryzen 2 isn't doing anything to convince you to not buy that.

Unless Anandtech's benches were correct and the newest SPECTRE mitigation patch for Intel kills their performance advantage.

[Misanthrope]

11 minutes ago, ravenshrike said:

Unless Anandtech's benches were correct and the newest SPECTRE mitigation patch for Intel kills their performance advantage.

Even then could intel home users choose not to patch? I mean it seems like a bad idea to be unpatched but if you just want them framerates at 144hz well....

 

Spoiler

 

[Suika]

4 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Even then could intel home users choose not to patch? I mean it seems like a bad idea to be unpatched but if you just want them framerates at 144hz well....

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I'm not entirely sure about that, because I have updates completely disabled on my desktop with metered connection and completely disabled services (mostly because I just don't have the bandwidth to allow Windows to freely update), but Windows still managed to force an update down my throat very recently.

 

I suppose someone more tech savvy than me could, but that's a very small chunk of the market for gamers.

[Misanthrope]

4 minutes ago, Suika said:

I'm not entirely sure about that, because I have updates completely disabled on my desktop with metered connection and completely disabled services (mostly because I just don't have the bandwidth to allow Windows to freely update), but Windows still managed to force an update down my throat very recently.

 

I suppose someone more tech savvy than me could, but that's a very small chunk of the market for gamers.

Well if you have to get that tech saavy might as well use Linux and GPU Passthrough: go all the way ultra geek like Level1Techs Wendell.

[Sharkyx1]

26 minutes ago, ravenshrike said:

Unless Anandtech's benches were correct and the newest SPECTRE mitigation patch for Intel kills their performance advantage.

If this turns out to be true my 3570k and 4670k are gonna get killed ??

[AresKrieger]

9 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

mean it seems like a bad idea to be unpatched

I can't patch even if I wanted to so whatever, it's not ransomware or something that can lock down my PC so it's threat potential is minimal to me especially with browser changes.

23 minutes ago, ravenshrike said:

Unless Anandtech's benches were correct and the newest SPECTRE mitigation patch for Intel kills their performance advantage.

Is that before or after AMD's spectre patch? Regardless I kinda doubt that it has any real effect for gaming at least, it will surely affect things like VM so I guess assassin's creed origins would be affected but frankly I would simply remove that garbage if I wanted to play it anyway (assuming it can be, it might not have been Denouvo was though so that's a plus)

[ravenshrike]

6 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Is that before or after AMD's spectre patch?

The latest AMD SPECTRE patches were included in the X470 BIOSes.

[DoctorWho1975]

43 minutes ago, AnonymousGuy said:

Were you looking to buy Ryzen 1?  Then buy Ryzen 2.  Were you planning on buying an 8700K? Ryzen 2 isn't doing anything to convince you to not buy that.

 

If you are streaming a stock Ryzen 2 destroys the 8700k, even when you overclock the 8700k, see GN video for a comparison, its pretty startling.

[AresKrieger]

9 minutes ago, DoctorWho1975 said:

 

If you are streaming a stock Ryzen 2 destroys the 8700k, even when you overclock the 8700k, see GN video for a comparison, its pretty startling.

Streaming is honestly a niche use case but yes the additional threads will help in that scenario, but that was true prior to ryzen 2 in most cases so that isn't new really (ie nothing changed as he said)

 

31 minutes ago, Suika said:

I suppose someone more tech savvy than me could, but that's a very small chunk of the market for gamers.

I generally just corrupt the updater with null values or block MS via a router, though neither is needed for windows 7 if they stop just before the windows 10 ad patch.

[DoctorWho1975]

Streaming is a niche? OK... if you say so.

[Suika]

12 minutes ago, DoctorWho1975 said:

If you are streaming a stock Ryzen 2 destroys the 8700k, even when you overclock the 8700k, see GN video for a comparison, its pretty startling.

Depending on the settings and game you play. PUBG will consume a surprising amount of threads, and not everybody will aim for medium encoding. Medium is primarily placebo, I can't the difference between it and faster. Yes the 2700X wins, but I'd say it only wins for the more hardcore streamers who aim for a quality output and make no sacrifices for the viewer, and honestly those people are probably better off with a second system.

4 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Streaming is honestly a niche use case but yes the additional threads will help in that scenario, but that was true prior to ryzen 2 in most cases so 

I wouldn't say it's all that niche, a lot of people stream, it's just not very many of them get popular. Especially once you play at high elos, I come across somebody streaming once every other competitive match.

[Misanthrope]

1 minute ago, DoctorWho1975 said:

Streaming is a niche? OK... if you say so.

Well it's not and if you want to start streaming (i.e. you're not a full time streamer or very dedicated) then the 2700(x) is the best choice.

 

But honestly most streamers that can afford it should be looking at HEDT either Threadripper or intel X299.

[DoctorWho1975]

3 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Well it's not and if you want to start streaming (i.e. you're not a full time streamer or very dedicated) then the 2700(x) is the best choice.

 

But honestly most streamers that can afford it should be looking at HEDT either Threadripper or intel X299.

Well I was just gonna let him believe what we wanted too, if he wants to believe its niche to make himself feel better about Ryzen's crushing domination over the 8700k in streaming well bless his heart.

 

Threadripper is meh for streaming.. sure if you are doing a mega-shit ton you could benefit but game performance and clocks aren't high enough to warrant it. I run my 1700 @ 3.9GHZ and with basic settings have no dropped packets with 2 to 4 cores not maxed out while streaming.

[pas008]

17 minutes ago, DoctorWho1975 said:

 

If you are streaming a stock Ryzen 2 destroys the 8700k, even when you overclock the 8700k, see GN video for a comparison, its pretty startling.

I just watched it but at work can you screenshot those pics for me cuz looked like on viewer side maybe

[AresKrieger]

13 minutes ago, Suika said:

I wouldn't say it's all that niche, a lot of people stream, it's just not very many of them get popular. Especially once you play at high elos, I come across somebody streaming once ever other competitive match.

Most people I've seen stream do it a couple times realize that the market is saturated and move on, so I guess you can say a lot of people stream but compared to the number who game it is insignificant, and those who do so for any notable amount of time are even rarer.

 

None of this matters though as that is a matter of how you define "niche" it's subjective what I was more so inputting on was that this was true for Ryzen 1, and before that Intels 8 core cpus because streaming like rendering likes cores.

[Misanthrope]

9 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Most people I've seen stream do it a couple times realize that the market is saturated and move on, so I guess you can say a lot of people stream but compared to the number who game it is insignificant, and those who do so for any notable amount of time are even rarer.

 

None of this matters though as that is a matter of how you define "niche" it's subjective what I was more so inputting on was that this was true for Ryzen 1, and before that Intels 8 core cpus because streaming like rendering likes cores.

I don't disagree with any of that, in fact I think it pretty much covers the use case for a 2700(x) instead of an 8700: an amateur streamer/content creator or someone who otherwise has a passing interest on it.

 

But yeah I didn't really address it as "this isn't a niche" but more among the lines of "Within the people who might stream, a respectable percentage will want an HEDT instead" so it's not automatically all streamers are 2700 there are better options for many of them.

[DocSwag]

4 hours ago, The Benjamins said:

Someone pointed out that Anandtechs gaming benchmarks for the 8700k is higher in the Ryzen review then the 8700k review. so really why is the Ryzen scores so good?

Definitely odd. Maybe windows updates and game updates improved performance on the 8700k? Could also be MCT related. They did test on a Gigabyte board at launch but an Asrock one in the Ryzen 2 review.

4 hours ago, Razor01 said:

Well they are re validating their data, so lets wait and see.

That's definitely going to take a while though, since just their game testing alone takes 4+ hours per CPU  

[Tic-Tac]

Somebody wrote:

 

 

"Singuy888 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link

Stop focusing on if Anandtech destroyed Coffee Lake's performance. They didn't. Look back at their coffee lake review and all the game numbers are the same. The real question is, how did they get Ryzen to perform so well!

Anandtech's Coffee lake review and they used a gtx 1080 with similar games. Here are the results for a 8700k.

Coffee Lake Review:

GTA V: 90.14

ROTR: 100.45

Shadow of Mordor. 152.57

Ryzen 2nd Gen Review Post Patch

GTA5: 91.77

ROTR: 103.63

Shadow of Mordor: 153.85

Post patch Intel chip actually shows improved performance so this is not about other reviewers not patching their processors but how did Anandtech get such kickass results with Ryzen 2nd Gen. "

[Taf the Ghost]

2 hours ago, Castdeath97 said:

Can anyone give me a TL;DR / TL;DW?

 

2 hours ago, Ben Quigley said:

They're a little bit better, little bit better price for performance but not worth the upgrade if you already have a ryzen CPU. Think of it like the RX400-RX500 upgrade but slightly better. 

If you got a Ryzen 1st Gen that responded well to high Memory speed (i.e. your 3200 kit worked at 3200 without much issue), then there's not much reason to upgrade unless you want to jump to some higher cores.

 

If your Ryzen 1st gen didn't OC well or your memory was stuck at 2666 & you have high speed RAM in there already, there might actually be a sizable drop-in upgrade.

 

Further, you don't really need to OC these parts. Max OC and Stock are really, really close because of the process node.

 

If you have any 4c Ryzen 1000 part, any of the new ones are huge drop-in upgrades.

 

 

2 hours ago, ImNotDeViLzzz said:

WTB reviews with 4K gaming benchmarks.  Seeing them use a GTX 1080 Ti and these cpus and not doing 4K gaming benchmarks is ridiculous. So far all I have seen is reviews with 1080p and 1440p gaming.

Even at 1440p, minus the busted Game Engines, it's all bottlenecked and all you're seeing different is the way the game engine responds to the CPU Architecture. 4K should all be minimal differences, minus the ARMA's of the world that are just less broken on Intel.