AMD Ryzen

[Andster29]

Has anyone done a complete comparison of the current AMD Ryzen chips against each other? I was also wonder has anyone taken the lowest end Ryzen chip and overclocked it to the same speed as the highest end chip to see if the Ryzen chips are in fact all the same just at different clock speeds. 

[BluJay614]

1 minute ago, Andster29 said:

Has anyone done a complete comparison of the current AMD Ryzen chips against each other? I was also wonder has anyone taken the lowest end Ryzen chip and overclocked it to the same speed as the highest end chip to see if the Ryzen chips are in fact all the same just at different clock speeds. 

Gamers Nexus is the only one that has really done the most extensive testing on this, I'd check them out.

[The Sloth]

1 minute ago, BluJay614 said:

Gamers Nexus is the only one that has really done the most extensive testing on this, I'd check them out.

i would check out all review channels rather than just one. 

[Evanair]

I know me and @Jumper118 were able to get very close Cinebench R15 scores, flipping between 5-10 difference depending on how we tweaked the rest of the system.  

[Streetguru]

8 minutes ago, Andster29 said:

Has anyone done a complete comparison of the current AMD Ryzen chips against each other? I was also wonder has anyone taken the lowest end Ryzen chip and overclocked it to the same speed as the highest end chip to see if the Ryzen chips are in fact all the same just at different clock speeds. 

All the R7 chips are basically the same, the 1800X might OC a bit better, but there's no reason to buy anything other than the R7 1700, since they all max out around 4ghz

[Andster29]

4 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

All the R7 chips are basically the same, the 1800X might OC a bit better, but there's no reason to buy anything other than the R7 1700, since they all max out around 4ghz

That is what I have been assuming. I just wanted to have some hard numbers and evidence to prove it before I started telling people to buy the 1700 and just overclock it to the 1800x

[Streetguru]

8 minutes ago, Andster29 said:

That is what I have been assuming. I just wanted to have some hard numbers and evidence to prove it before I started telling people to buy the 1700 and just overclock it to the 1800x

It's just like all the FX 8 cores being the same chip, just clocked differently out of the box, or they're able to hold a higher base frequency at stock voltage

[Jumper118]

On average the 1700 are 100mhz slower than the 1800x..... Not much 

[SCHISCHKA]

the 1700 is a bargain compared to the others. lower power consumption too

[Evanair]

2 hours ago, Andster29 said:

That is what I have been assuming. I just wanted to have some hard numbers and evidence to prove it before I started telling people to buy the 1700 and just overclock it to the 1800x

A thing to consider is the binning process.  If you're going to run Stock, the 1700x will OC itself as necessary where as a 1700 won't, but it's TDP is lower.  Looking back, I probably could have gotten away with a 1700x instead of an 1800x, but I'm ok with it because I've gotten some good OC's out of it, even on an underdeveliped BIOS platform.  Also, if they want to run anything other than stock DDR4 numbers, be sure to buy off the QVL list and not what a store has.  

Bottom line, If anyone asked me based on my experience, I'd recommend a 1700x out of the three.  And that's just my opinion based on viewing numbers and owning an 1800x. 

[Andster29]

3 hours ago, Jumper118 said:

On average the 1700 are 100mhz slower than the 1800x..... Not much 

I am talking more real world performance, because we all know clocks speeds do to show the whole picture.  

[Jumper118]

6 hours ago, Andster29 said:

I am talking more real world performance, because we all know clocks speeds do to show the whole picture.  

Well of course they are the same architecture so they perform exactly the same at the same clock speed. 

[kladzen]

11 hours ago, Andster29 said:

Has anyone done a complete comparison of the current AMD Ryzen chips against each other? I was also wonder has anyone taken the lowest end Ryzen chip and overclocked it to the same speed as the highest end chip to see if the Ryzen chips are in fact all the same just at different clock speeds. 

I have a 1700 @ 3.9ghz, 1.325 voltage - with 2933mhz ram... 

[Dylsmurf]

Overclocked my Ryzen 1700 to 4Ghz @ 1.37V.

 

Currently running it at 3.9Ghz @ 1.35v due to only having a stock cooler. It manages at 4Ghz, but on a hot day it'd be pushing it without after market cooling...

 

Some reviews say they've only managed 3.9 on the 1700, but mine managed 4.0 very easily. Overall the 1700x is useless (1700 100% can do the same as it) and the 1800x is a $150 jump for the guarantee that it'll clock to ~4.0/4.1.

 

tl;dr: How far a 1700 will go is luck, but almost all chips should manage 3.9, with a guarantee of 3.7.

[Dylsmurf]

11 hours ago, Evanair said:

A thing to consider is the binning process.  If you're going to run Stock, the 1700x will OC itself as necessary where as a 1700 won't, but it's TDP is lower.  Looking back, I probably could have gotten away with a 1700x instead of an 1800x, but I'm ok with it because I've gotten some good OC's out of it, even on an underdeveliped BIOS platform.  Also, if they want to run anything other than stock DDR4 numbers, be sure to buy off the QVL list and not what a store has.  

Bottom line, If anyone asked me based on my experience, I'd recommend a 1700x out of the three.  And that's just my opinion based on viewing numbers and owning an 1800x. 

I thought this at first but in reality the difference is as simple as downloading Ryzen Master, putting in 3.9Ghz @ 1.35 (and 1.05 SOC) and clicking save+apply on the 1700. There's nothing else to it - I'm yet to here any 1700 owners who weren't able to push 3.9, though some rare few I've heard struggle with 4.0. The 1800x is good for those who want guaranteed higher clocks (you can basically be assured they'll manage 4.0), but this luxury comes at a price... The 1700x on the other hand has no real place - there's no benefit to it over a 1700 at this stage.

 

tl;dr: ~$70 + 95w TDP cooler for downloading a program and typing in a few figures.... You've basically saved yourself $100 for literally 5 minutes work.

[Evanair]

4 hours ago, Dylsmurf said:

dr: ~$70 + 95w TDP cooler for downloading a program and typing in a few figures.... You've basically saved yourself $100 for literally 5 minutes work

I'll save you another headake. Ryzen master resets itself. A lot. Plus SoC voltage isn't in there. Even if that wasn't an issue, you're going to want to remove HPET from Windows control and pass it back to the hardware. This is true for any Ryzen chip, even not overclocked. Ryzen Master doesn't like that tho.

 

So basically, all I'm saying is your OC will be done in bios. Not that big of a deal tho.

[Dylsmurf]

On 3/18/2017 at 4:15 AM, Evanair said:

I'll save you another headake. Ryzen master resets itself. A lot. Plus SoC voltage isn't in there. Even if that wasn't an issue, you're going to want to remove HPET from Windows control and pass it back to the hardware. This is true for any Ryzen chip, even not overclocked. Ryzen Master doesn't like that tho.

 

So basically, all I'm saying is your OC will be done in bios. Not that big of a deal tho.

Have you updated? SoC is there on mine and I've not had any problems (yet)...

 

Plus bios forces a fixed clock, where as Ryzen Master allows windows power modes to still do their thing.