Any downsides to Ryzen?

[Andreas Lilja]

Besides the possibility that the specs / benchmarks or prices are far off? 

 

For gaming and everyday use. 

 

Was eyeing 7700k (with ROG Maximus IX Hero), now looking at 1700X (with ROG Crosshair VI Hero). 

 

Either for 1080 GTX. SLI considered in the future. 

 

 

 

 

[AlwaysFSX]

It might fucking suck.

[Oshino Shinobu]

Just wait. It's only 9 days. We know no more than you do. 

[Andreas Lilja]

9 minutes ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

Just wait. It's only 9 days. We know no more than you do. 

That's what I thought. At least to some extent.

 

But it has already happened that everything fizzled on launch day? For those who've followed the industry for a while. CPUs or not. 

 

[Clanscorpia]

Cringy AMD fanboys

[Mooshi]

It doesn't exist on shelves is what's a downside. That side, imma build a Ryzen rig in March for my GF. She has my old 2500k, but I don't trust the board (it's already on a used ebay board from 2012 since the original mobo I had died.) 

[Gene Starwind]

32 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

It might fucking suck.

There is almost no chance of that at this point.

 

The only downside is it's not out yet.  Seriously, if this performs as expected, then intel has nothing to offer in 2017, aside from maybe the pentium.

 

I couldn't recommend amd cpus in 2016, and it looks like I won't be recommending intel in 2017.

[stealth80]

its Hype, wait for reviews, don't buy before

[Gene Starwind]

3 minutes ago, stealth80 said:

its Hype, wait for reviews, don't buy before

It's not though.  We have plenty of info, including two official benchmarks.

[stealth80]

6 minutes ago, Gene Starwind said:

It's not though.  We have plenty of info, including two official benchmarks.

no, you have "leaked" benchmarks, they may be true, they may be from people just generating traffic on their own sites

[Gene Starwind]

4 minutes ago, stealth80 said:

no, you have "leaked" benchmarks, they may be true, they may be from people just generating traffic on their own sites

AMD did 2 promos where they showed the zen beating the 6900k.

 

Obviously AMD picked test that made their cpu look better, but it's still impressive.

[stealth80]

1 minute ago, Gene Starwind said:

AMD did 2 promos where they showed the zen beating the 6900k.

haha yes, but we don't know what they used exactly and it was in applications that they picked, so they will AMD friendly. I'm no fan boy, but we see this a lot, wait for the official unbiased reviews, the rest is hype/rumour! Trust me I want it to be true, a 6c/12t cpu that beats all of broadwells for $259, yes please

[Gene Starwind]

I am ordering a 1600x day one.

[JoostinOnline]

Assuming it's actually successful, it means I won't be able to crap on AMD CPU's without looking up their model.

[Gene Starwind]

GL ripping amd when they dominate the desktop market in 2017.

[dizmo]

32 minutes ago, Gene Starwind said:

It's not though.  We have plenty of info, including two official benchmarks.

AMD hasn't had the best track record for benchmarking fairly. They almost never live up to what they claim.

[Gene Starwind]

1 minute ago, dizmo said:

AMD hasn't had the best track record for benchmarking fairly. They almost never live up to what they claim.

A true of anyone in marketing.  The key is to sift through the bullshit.  This is the real deal!

[Laggger164]

Some features are not present on Ryzen that Intel has, like Thunderbolt for example, the other stuff that they put in Kaby lake, nothing major tho.

[JoostinOnline]

22 minutes ago, Laggger164 said:

Some features are not present on Ryzen that Intel has, like Thunderbolt for example, the other stuff that they put in Kaby lake, nothing major tho.

Because of their dirty dealing with Intel and Microsoft, you won't be able to play 4K Netflix videos with Ryzen. 

[dizmo]

1 hour ago, Gene Starwind said:

A true of anyone in marketing.  The key is to sift through the bullshit.  This is the real deal!

You know nothing until actual benchmarks have come out from unbaised sources.

[Scitesh]

4 hours ago, Gene Starwind said:

There is almost no chance of that at this point.

 

The only downside is it's not out yet.  Seriously, if this performs as expected, then intel has nothing to offer in 2017, aside from maybe the pentium.

 

I couldn't recommend amd cpus in 2016, and it looks like I won't be recommending intel in 2017.

Unless they drop cannon/Apollo Lake in 2 months with a 6c/12T on mainstream Chipsets

[PianoPlayer88Key]

53 minutes ago, Scitesh said:

Unless they drop cannon/Apollo Lake in 2 months with a 6c/12T on mainstream Chipsets

I'm hoping Intel releases a 6c/12t CPU on LGA1151.  Right now my laptop (which has that socket, yes) has an i7-6700K, and if I could get a 6c/12t chip in a couple years on Black Friday for a decent price,  I might go for it.  (Won't buy on launch day, though; would prefer to wait until the first non-compatible SKU is released, then get the compatible CPU.)  If not, it's no big deal.

 

As for the desktop, possible upgrade ... I'm poking along with an LGA1150-based i7-4790K, on an ASRock Z97 Extreme6.  I'm hoping to make a jump to Ryzen, but a few downsides for me include:

• too little RAM support (Prefer minimum of 128GB, preferably 256GB or 512GB)
• too few PCI-E slots (would like at least 6 or 7 x16 physical slots.  At least 50% have to be x16 electrically, the rest: minimum x8)
• too few SATA ports (prefer a minimum of 12)
• may not still be in-place upgradeable in 10 years.  (I've previously explained how I prefer replacing the case, motherboard & PSU at the same time, and how I'd like to do a few large-$/performance jump CPU upgrades over the life of a board, every few years or so.)

I wish there was a Ryzen board like the ASRock X99 WS-E, ASUS X99-E WS,  ASUS Z10PE-D16 WS, etc, with the AMD discount.  (My budget for a board would be up to around $300.  Hopefully on the ones like I described, the AMD discount's percentage would be similar to how much cheaper the CPUs are than what rumors say the Intel equivalent performers are.)

 

And, like others have said, we don't yet know the actual performance.  I'd be elated if an R7 1700X or similar CPU would leapfrog Intel *lake's IPC, or at least pull 200+ in Cinebench R15 single-threaded at stock non-boost frequency, but I'd be content if it's comparable to my 4790K or 6700K in IPC, and double in multi-threaded tasks.  (Being able to go from, say, 5-6 fps, to like 10-15 fps in video encoding, like 4K H.264, would be a huge benefit for me.  Ideally I'd like 30 or 60 fps, but I'm not willing to pay the server tax.)

[atavax]

For single threaded applications Kaby lake will probably be slightly better than Ryzen.

 

 

Ryzen is a drastically different/new architecture and there will probably be problems at launch.

[NumLock21]

A product that hasn't officially launch yet and there's already doubts on its performance. What a bunch of negativity in this thread.

 

Ryzen will be awesome! It will be so awesome, that everytime you power that sucker, it will create a magical rainbow in your computer.

[Curious Pineapple]

2 hours ago, NumLock21 said:

A product that hasn't officially launch yet and there's already doubts on its performance. What a bunch of negativity in this thread.

 

Ryzen will be awesome! It will be so awesome, that everytime you power that sucker, it will create a magical rainbow in your computer.

It won't. The magical rainbow is reserved for shooting out of the arse of Intel and into the mouths of rabid fanboys