Further proof that Windows 10 is causing a perf hit with the Ryzen CPU

[zMeul]

 

[JamieOlive]

1 hour ago, zMeul said:

 

Alright, I have a question. Why do all the reviewer's test so many games and applications, with 2 Titan XPs??

 

I mean, you want to avoid bottlenecks but, why not a 1080 or 1070 that will show real world result, both of those are insanely powerful cards for 1080 and1440p.

 

Furthermore, the videos all over the web say Ryzen isn't meant for games get a 7700K, why don't they talk about future proofing and price/performance, those things matter for real consumers.

 

And lastly of course they need time to develope bioses and Microsoft should get its shit tofether seriously.

 

I don't know about you but I feel that half the game is rigged for Intel's shake.

[Ashiella]

On 3/4/2017 at 8:38 PM, TechGod said:

Yup. It gains around 6fps on the average with W7 and a very noticeable 13fps difference in the minimums and that is very good since my i5 6500 isn't the strongest chip and if I do drop to my minimum fps, I DO feel it. 

Yeah, and on Intel cpus w10 is better than w7

[Taf the Ghost]

5 minutes ago, Ashiella said:

Yeah, and on Intel cpus w10 is better than w7

Obviously, we need to test it on Windows 8.1 to make it fair.  

[Taf the Ghost]

8 minutes ago, JamieOlive said:

Alright, I have a question. Why do all the reviewer's test so many games and applications, with 2 Titan XPs??

 

I mean, you want to avoid bottlenecks but, why not a 1080 or 1070 that will show real world result, both of those are insanely powerful cards for 1080 and1440p.

 

Furthermore, the videos all over the web say Ryzen isn't meant for games get a 7700K, why don't they talk about future proofing and price/performance, those things matter for real consumers.

 

And lastly of course they need time to develope bioses and Microsoft should get its shit tofether seriously.

 

I don't know about you but I feel that half the game is rigged for Intel's shake.

In theory, it's to remove GPU bottlenecking, something you'll see heavily at 4K gaming.  Some 4K games you can max out with a recent Celeron, as they simply don't need to send much data to the CPU since the GPU has so many textures to deal with.  In practice, that's not really the case and it's been clear most Reviewers haven't ever spent any time dealing with many statistics or they'd see the glaring problems a lot faster.  There's been a noticeable toning down of the negativity with the 2nd round of reviews, and I think not trying to fight with massive memory problems on a really tight timeline might have a lot to do with that.

 

The real "tell" over what's been going on has cropped up in a few of the outlying test results.  Some of the normal settings Tomb Raider at 1080p are hitting 500+ FPS on the 7700k, but the Ryzens are hitting around the same 350 fps as the old FX chips.  That clearly points to some sort of interaction that doesn't scale as highly given the programs.  If it was just scaling with pure thorough-put, we wouldn't see Ryzen results all over the place.  We also wouldn't see a lot of high-end i7 Minimum / i5 Maximum FPS results.  It points to scaling headroom with the CPU issues, which could be down to the scheduler.

 

In short, this is a brand new Architecture and Chipset, so getting in now is going to come with some Cutting Edge costs.  R7s aren't really the target for budget-conscious gamers right now.

[zMeul]

4 hours ago, JamieOlive said:

Alright, I have a question. Why do all the reviewer's test so many games and applications, with 2 Titan XPs??

 

I mean, you want to avoid bottlenecks but, why not a 1080 or 1070 that will show real world result, both of those are insanely powerful cards for 1080 and1440p.

 

Furthermore, the videos all over the web say Ryzen isn't meant for games get a 7700K, why don't they talk about future proofing and price/performance, those things matter for real consumers.

 

And lastly of course they need time to develope bioses and Microsoft should get its shit tofether seriously.

 

I don't know about you but I feel that half the game is rigged for Intel's shake.

what are "we" testing CPU performance or GPU performance?

to test the CPU performance you put in the system them most powerful video card(s) available - and at this moment, the Pascal Titan X is the most powerful; until 1080Ti arrives

 

"future proofing" is a bullshit term - a product is already obsolete as it hits the market because the next products after it will be better than it

i5s are better than Ryzen - they offer same performance for a lot less cost

 

need time? then AMD should not have released a product that's not polished

 

 

yes yes .. blame Intel for AMD's stupid shit

[cj09beira]

 

[cj09beira]

39 minutes ago, zMeul said:

what are "we" testing CPU performance or GPU performance?

to test the CPU performance you put in the system them most powerful video card(s) available - and at this moment, the Pascal Titan X is the most powerful; until 1080Ti arrives

 

"future proofing" is a bullshit term - a product is already obsolete as it hits the market because the next products after it will be better than it

i5s are better than Ryzen - they offer same performance for a lot less cost

 

need time? then AMD should not have released a product that's not polished

 

 

yes yes .. blame Intel for AMD's stupid shit

if we have two cpus at around the same frame rate in 1440p, and one is sitting at 98% utilization and the other at 48%, which is the more powerful one, which will be the best in the long one, yes the one which isn't at 98%, thats ryzen in a nutshell right now

[Mira Yurizaki]

This is one game. Let me know if this is still a thing after a few more games.

 

(Made another post because too worried an edit would be buried from replies)

[Mira Yurizaki]

Since I feel like nobody's going to see anything if I edit it, I'll just post again.

 

So again, this is just one game from one person's configuration, and the person even noted the following:

Quote

At the moment this is just pure speculation as there were variables, which could not be isolated.
Windows 10 figures were recorded using PresentMon (OCAT), however with Windows 7 it was necessary to use Fraps.

I mean I could argue that a "Game Mode" will cause issues with GTA V after doing a "lean" Windows build and noticing that the minimum frame rates for my GTA V runs were worse than the minimum frame rates on the "vanilla" Windows build.

 

If you want to "prove" this is a problem, offer more data. For now, this proves nothing.

[Sauron]

Hopefully it gets patched soon

[zMeul]

19 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

if we have two cpus at around the same frame rate in 1440p, and one is sitting at 98% utilization and the other at 48%, which is the more powerful one, which will be the best in the long one, yes the one which isn't at 98%, thats ryzen in a nutshell right now

o'really?

then why don't you go buy a couple

 

you might as well buy some of those Broadwell-E, since you apply same logic

[cj09beira]

5 minutes ago, zMeul said:

o'really?

then why don't you go buy a couple

 

you might as well buy some of those Broadwell-E, since you apply same logic

i might, but not now, i am waiting for the drivers and scheduler be fixed on win, 

i do firmly believe that the future is with more cores and that games in the future will gain a lot from it, 

[zMeul]

Just now, cj09beira said:

i might, but not now, i am waiting for the drivers and scheduler be fixed on win, 

i do firmly believe that the future is with more cores and that games in the future will gain a lot from it, 

please read my whole post

[TOMPPIX]

7 minutes ago, zMeul said:

o'really?

then why don't you go buy a couple

 

you might as well buy some of those Broadwell-E, since you apply same logic

are you denying what he just said?

[zMeul]

2 minutes ago, TOMPPIX said:

are you denying what he just said?

what?!

I'm not the one applying BS logic to make excuses

 

if you apply same logic to Ryzen, then you apply same logic to Broadwell-E - and that results, in his BS logic, that more expensive CPU with the more cores is better

well then ...

[TechGod]

1 minute ago, zMeul said:

what?!

I'm not the one applying BS logic to make excuses

 

if you apply same logic to Ryzen, then you apply same logic to Broadwell-E - and that results, in his BS logic, that more expensive CPU with the more cores is better

well then ...

Dude why do you hate AMD so much? Where did they hurt you?

[TOMPPIX]

Just now, zMeul said:

what?!

I'm not the one applying BS logic to make excuses

 

if you apply same logic to Ryzen, then you apply same logic to Broadwell-E - and that results, in his BS logic, that more expensive CPU with the more cores is better

if in the future games start taking advantage of more cores (and they will) the cpu will have a longer life cycle. 

[zMeul]

14 minutes ago, TOMPPIX said:

if in the future games start taking advantage of more cores (and they will) the cpu will have a longer life cycle. 

if ???!!?

 

how about we cut the crap

game developers that have natively put products on the market for PC haven't given much credit to multicore performance

ARMA3 - gamed developed for PC; what does the developer do? creates a single threaded game

 

gaming was, is, and will be IPC dependent than multicore dependent

[TOMPPIX]

2 minutes ago, zMeul said:

if ???!!?

 

how about we cut the crap

game developers that have natively put products on the market for PC haven't given much credit to multicore performance

ARMA3 - gamed developed for PC; what does the developer do? creates a single threaded game

ARMA 3 came out 2013, vulkan and directx 12 hadn't even been announced back then.

[zMeul]

Just now, TOMPPIX said:

ARMA 3 came out 2013, vulkan and directx 12 hadn't even been announced back then.

lol!?!

again with BS logic, if you apply same logic to Ryzen, then the same is true for other CPUs

[TOMPPIX]

2 minutes ago, zMeul said:

lol!?!

again with BS logic, if you apply same logic to Ryzen, then the same is true for other CPUs

indeed it is. why would it not be?

[raphidy]

22 minutes ago, TOMPPIX said:

if in the future games start taking advantage of more cores (and they will) the cpu will have a longer life cycle. 

Then my dual 2670 will be future future proof. /s

 

I get you say. I am incline to buy more than 4 cores for my next purchase because of all the crap that run in the background when gaming and having more threads in my main pc is really nice for productivity when I need it. I am waiting for x299 to come out and see which platform is better.

[cj09beira]

36 minutes ago, zMeul said:

lol!?!

again with BS logic, if you apply same logic to Ryzen, then the same is true for other CPUs

Don't you see that you are the one with bullshit logic,

a game from 2013 isn't multi-threaded == games don't use multiple cores

complete bullshit

if you go and look for old cpus you will see constantly that the ones with most cores will last the longest.

[cj09beira]

32 minutes ago, raphidy said:

Then my dual 2670 will be future future proof. /s

 

I get you say. I am incline to buy more than 4 cores for my next purchase because of all the crap that run in the background when gaming and having more threads in my main pc is really nice for productivity when I need it. I am waiting for x299 to come out and see which platform is better.

as with every thing theres a point where it stops helping, the problem with the 2670 (even worst for the 2650) is low clock speed, and expensive motherboards