AMD Ryzen R7 1800X performance review - TechPowerUp

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, TOMPPIX said:

not where i live.

OK???? The 1800X won't be cheaper though...

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, MoonSpot said:

Not even fucking close.

The 6800K costs $400

The 5820K costs $380

The 7700K costs $340

The 6700K costs $300

(In the US)

You can definitely get a CPU that will perform better in games and similarly in productivity applications (the 5820K and the 6800K)

[Morgan MLGman]

14 minutes ago, LeStringMan said:

Infinity Fabric is based upon, and is an improvement on AMD's Hypertransport Link, HT Link was first introduced in 2003 in AMD cpus, and replaced the traditional Front Side Bus, Intel's QuickPath Interconnect does the same thing and was introduced in 2008. 

Yep, that is true, I never said it's a new technology I said it's better than QPI which is true considering that with 3000MHz+ RAM you get twice the QPI's bandwidth.

 

13 minutes ago, TOMPPIX said:

huehue and here we have even further proof that no games even utilize the ryzen 7 cpu properly, no games really take advantage of all 8 cores. 

Wrong on so many levels...

Let's get those things straight:

1. Zen > Kaby Lake in terms of efficiency.

2. There are games which use even 36 threads, check out The Witcher 3. Even Nvidia admitted it in their guide to set the graphics settings properly.

3. 8 Zen cores have equal power consumption as 4 Kaby Lake cores in Prime95 which puts both CPUs under the same kind of load and locks them at 100%. Thoughts on that one?

4. 8 core CPUs are not meant for gaming, yet.

 

11 minutes ago, Alexokan said:

A very good point. Single channel memory on the lesser sku's would have killed them. 

 

AMD still made strange concessions with this architecture that you would of thought they learned from with bulldozer. 

 

I know it probably cuts down on costs and allows them to be more competitive with pricing but I would have rather see them go all in and come out with a product that is directly competitive or even dethrones Intel. 

What's very interesting: If AMD continues their philosophy on APUs and Athlons from past generations, could this be how they'd look like?

 

APUs:

CCX (4 cores) =Infinity Fabric= CCX (Vega iGPU)

 

But what about Athlons? They were just APUs with the iGPU disabled (most likely because of damage in the manufacturing process), but then they'd support only single-channel memory?

What would they look like?

CCX (4 cores) =Infinity Fabric= CCX (disabled Vega iGPU)? Maybe.

The question is, whether AMD can achieve disabling the second CCX with iGPU without losing the dual-channel capabilities of the chip...

 

Though this is only my own speculation based on their previous architecture, take with a grain of salt. Or a truckload. Whatever

 

[TOMPPIX]

4 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

OK???? The 1800X won't be cheaper though...

ryzen with a good motherboard

Spoiler

 

https://www.jimms.fi/fi/Product/Show/127884/ab350-pro4/asrock-ab350-pro4-atx-emolevy 

https://www.jimms.fi/fi/Product/Show/127412/yd180xbcaewof/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-am4-3_6-ghz-8-core

 

intel 

Spoiler

 

https://www.jimms.fi/fi/Product/Show/121135/bx80671i76800k/intel-broadwell-e-i7-6800k-lga2011-v3-3_4-ghz-15mb-boxed

https://www.jimms.fi/fi/Product/Show/106882/ga-x99-ud3/gigabyte-x99-ud3-lga2011-v3-intel-x99-ddr4-atx

 

 

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, TOMPPIX said:

ryzen with 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

https://www.jimms.fi/fi/Product/Show/127884/ab350-pro4/asrock-ab350-pro4-atx-emolevy 

https://www.jimms.fi/fi/Product/Show/127412/yd180xbcaewof/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-am4-3_6-ghz-8-core

 

intel 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

https://www.jimms.fi/fi/Product/Show/121135/bx80671i76800k/intel-broadwell-e-i7-6800k-lga2011-v3-3_4-ghz-15mb-boxed

https://www.jimms.fi/fi/Product/Show/106882/ga-x99-ud3/gigabyte-x99-ud3-lga2011-v3-intel-x99-ddr4-atx

 

 

You won't be able to OC the 1800X to 4GHz with that motherboard.... But you will be able to OC a 5820K (which is cheaper and OCs better) to 4.6GHz with the X99 UD3. The 5820K will be very similar in GPU accelerated productivity applications and it will destroy the 1800X in games. The choice between the 2 comes down to:

• Raw performance
• Price/performance

[TOMPPIX]

2 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

You won't be able to OC the 1800X to 4GHz with that motherboard.... But you will be able to OC a 5820K (which is cheaper and OCs better) to 4.6GHz with the X99 UD3. The 5820K will be very similar in GPU accelerated productivity applications and it will destroy the 1800X in games. The choice between the 2 comes down to:

• Raw performance
• Price/performance

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, TOMPPIX said:

READ

3 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

You won't be able to OC the 1800X to 4GHz with that motherboard....

 

[Morgan MLGman]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

You won't be able to OC the 1800X to 4GHz with that motherboard.... But you will be able to OC a 5820K (which is cheaper and OCs better) to 4.6GHz with the X99 UD3. The 5820K will be very similar in GPU accelerated productivity applications and it will destroy the 1800X in games. The choice between the 2 comes down to:

• Raw performance
• Price/performance

I wouldn't be so sure about that one (bolded) though... Look at the gaming performance summary between the 7700K and 1800X from the review, it's not that much worse overall in games and it has higher IPC than the 5820K... And as you see, overclocking the CPU itself doesn't yield nearly as big of an impact in games as overclocking of the RAM on the 1800X.

 

 

5820K isn't better than that relatively to the 7700K in gaming, no way imo... And X99 boards are still ridiculously expensive...

[TOMPPIX]

1 minute ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

READ

 

so a 9+2 phase vrm design is not enough.

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

Look at the gaming performance summary between the 7700K and 1800X from the review, it's not that much worse overall in games and it has higher IPC than the 5820K...

The 7700K runs at 4.2GHz though.... If you OC the 7700K, it will be much better. BTW, check this out:

 

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, TOMPPIX said:

so a 9+2 phase vrm design is not enough.

AFAIK, Ryzen needs a higher end motherboard to get a good overclock.....

[Hunter259]

QPI != Infinity Fabric in the mainstream market... QPI only connects single CPU's to the chipset and with multi chip boards you take multiple QPI's to connect the processors together and connect them to the chipset. QPI isn't even used on the mainstream market anymore. They use DMI now which is just as fast as Infinity Fabric for chipset communication.

[Morgan MLGman]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

The 7700K runs at 4.2GHz though.... If you OC the 7700K, it will be much better. BTW, check this out:

 

I'm gonna watch the video when I get home, can't do that now sadly

I know the 7700K runs at 4,2GHz, but the 1800X in reality runs only at 3,7/3,8GHz at all cores when it's at stock. 4,0GHz(4,1GHz with XFR) works only on one/two cores.

And 4,2GHz of Kaby Lake is around 4,5-4,6GHz of Haswell

[Guest]

I thnk the thread is turning into more of a claim game than real evidences supporting them. (I might be very wrong as I'm not that of an expert in the field). But OC on specific motherboard to specific clocks of specific cpus without taking cooling method in consideration is not defined, and other stuffs too. What I want to say is that rather than being a fanboy of specific company, accept the reality and learn from each other, rather claiming anything or everything to support your brand.

(I'm sorry if it offends you, I don't mean it)

[Misanthrope]

1 hour ago, Zackbare said:

Well sacrificing 2-5 Fps for lower power consumption, come on AMD haters you people babble about nothing..

Have you looked at the Fallout 4 and Hitman results? It's more like 30+ FPS.

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

I'm gonna watch the video when I get home, can't do that now sadly

In their tests, the 1800X is around 20-25% slower on average than the 7700K.... 

Here is a written version of this review:

http://www.techspot.com/review/1348-amd-ryzen-gaming-performance/

[Guest]

Just now, Misanthrope said:

Have you looked at the Fallout 4 and Hitman results? It's more like 30+ FPS.

Those games are specifically defined, not all games are made in a same way. What if I say about intel's performance in Crysis, that is just simply unjustified. 

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, Zackbare said:

What I want to say is that rather than being a fanboy of specific company, accept the reality and learn from each other, rather claiming anything or everything to support your brand.

No one here is being a fanboy.... Ryzen is an amazing CPU for productivity and that's it. For gaming, just look elsewhere. (Unless you mostly do content creation and you game only when you have time)

[Misanthrope]

3 minutes ago, Zackbare said:

Those games are specifically defined, not all games are made in a same way. What if I say about intel's performance in Crysis, that is just simply unjustified. 

So whatever results favor your narrative are ok but whatever results go against it are "unjustified"?

 

No the graphs speak for themselves: Stop talking about testing methodology or game relevance, the 7700k did not loose badly on any of the test yet it did win by a really big margin on some of the tests. Reproducible by other reviewers. Even at 1440p so no it's not just bad for high refresh rate gamers. Ryzen is just already outdated for gaming, period.

 

Maybe in some years if we get games using 8 threads efficiently things will change but again, many people bought Excavator turds with the promise of future improvements and that seems to be always the case for AMD buyers: just keep waiting and waiting and waiting things will get better we promise!

[PCGuy_5960]

3 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Have you looked at the Fallout 4 and Hitman results? It's more like 30+ FPS.

2 minutes ago, Zackbare said:

Those games are specifically defined, not all games are made in a same way. What if I say about intel's performance in Crysis, that is just simply unjustified. 

Or, find benchmarks for the games that you play and call it a day.

[Misanthrope]

2 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Or, find benchmarks for the games that you play and call it a day.

In which case the 7700k never really loses by a significant margin.

 

So instead what we've been saying all along: If you game, forget Ryzen (at least until you get on low end i5 pricing territory) but if you do other Workstation stuff then maybe take a look.

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

Excavator turds with the promise of future improvements and that seems to be always the case for AMD buyers: just keep waiting and waiting and waiting things will get better we promise!

4 years later:

WHY IS INTEL STILL WINNING?????

[N3v3r3nding_N3wb]

1 hour ago, DocSwag said:

I'm definitely interested in how far the quad core SKUs can overclock, since if they do OC well it could actually force Intel to lower prices.

The Samsung/GloFo 14nm LPP+ process doesn't lend itself well to 4 GHz+ overclocks, at least not in its current form.

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

So instead what we've been saying all along: If you game, forget Ryzen (at least until you get on low end i5 pricing territory) but if you do other Workstation stuff then maybe take a look.

And another possibility, if you game a lot, but you also do content creation, get the 5820K/6800K.

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, N3v3r3nding_N3wb said:

The Samsung/GloFo 14nm LPP+ process doesn't lend itself well to 4 GHz+ overclocks, at least not in its current form.

We can tell if we take a look at how polaris overclocks