Should Ryzen 1800x be compared with 7700k ?

[Guest]

A simple question, should Ryzen 1800x be compared with 7700k ? (both in gaming and work) If not, then to what?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Zackbare said:

If not, then to what?

i7-6800k or i7 6900k

[Ya_Mi]

No.

Cause people will goes crazy over 4-10 more fps on 7700k.

[Guest]

Just now, deXxterlab97 said:

i7-6800k or i7 6900k

please elaborate with a reason and probably with charts.

[The Sloth]

in work 1800x hands down, in gaming 7700k hands down, no comparison. if work is your main task go for 1800x, if you play games as the main purpose get the 7700k but streaming or heavy multitasking would go for 1800x. 

[WMGroomAK]

A simple answer is that all processors should be compared to as many as possible in all different scenarios.  The consumer needs to educate themselves on what their need is and select a processor that then suits that need, whether it is just gaming, productivity or a mixed workload.  

[The Sloth]

Just now, Zackbare said:

please elaborate with a reason and probably with charts.

6 core is  sweet spot but x99 is generally more expensive. 

[Thinkfreely]

I just got my 1700x and Ryzen board installed (Reviews coming I promise just been slammed). I have been messing with overclocking it trying to find the sweet spot (got the apparently mythical 4.1-4.2 but wasn't stable so I had to go back to 4.0. Coming from the i7 6700k, I can't notice any difference except in when I use the extra cores (Battlefield 1 and content creation. Were dealing with a new platform while Intel is working with new revisions, its apples and oranges. They both taste good, but they are going to be different no matter what. AMD is banking on new VULCAN and DX12 where developers will make use of more than 4 cores, and by making all ryzen chips overclock-able, they are creating incentive to just buy the cheaper chip and overclock it to match performance, which is very appealing to many people.

 

FYI I am not a fanboy of either. I built with AMD for first 2-3 rigs, then did intel for the last 5 years, now have reason to build with AMD again. And so it goes.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Zackbare said:

please elaborate with a reason and probably with charts.

They are literally everywhere all over the internet, just look it up. Here's Linus as an example

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, deXxterlab97 said:

...

 

4 minutes ago, Ya_Mi said:

...

 

4 minutes ago, nerdslayer1 said:

...

 

3 minutes ago, WMGroomAK said:

...

The  reason I ask this is that Ryzen has a CCX problem, which you can look up here for - https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/753642-amd-ryzen-r7-1800x-performance-review-techpowerup

or here https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/753672-ryzen-gaming-in-the-future/

 

AND also 

 

[MorganO]

8 minutes ago, Zackbare said:

A simple question, should Ryzen 1800x be compared with 7700k ? (both in gaming and work) If not, then to what?

they shouldn't yet people due to pricing

the 7700k is a good gaming cpu with 'productivity' on the side

the ryzen 7 CPU's are good productivity with gaming on the side 

 

 

games generally like fewer faster cores

productivity generally likes more albeit slower cores

[The Sloth]

3 minutes ago, Zackbare said:

 

 

 

The  reason I ask this is that Ryzen has a CCX problem, which you can look up here for - https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/753642-amd-ryzen-r7-1800x-performance-review-techpowerup

or here https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/753672-ryzen-gaming-in-the-future/

 

AND also 

 

 

 

 

not to be that guy

-bios will be fixed soon or is being fixed 

-if you are just gaming get a 7700k 

-memory will be fixed, 2400 or 2800 mhz memory will be enough for most people 

- overclocking a 1700 to 3.9 or 4.2 ghz seems to be worth it for most reviewers 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, nerdslayer1 said:

-not to be that guy, bios will be fixed soon or is being fixed 

-if you are just gaming get a 7700k 

-memory will be fixed, 2400 or 2800 mhz memory will be enough for most people 

- overclocking a 1700 to 3.9 or 4.2 ghz seems to be worth it for most reviewers 

And I heard that Ryzen are difficult to optimize for ram and also for overclocking and stuff? Is it true somewhat? Will it be fixed?

[PCGuy_5960]

11 minutes ago, Ya_Mi said:

No.

Cause people will goes crazy over 4-10 more fps on 7700k.

More like 15-30FPS... Anyway, all X99 CPUs beat Ryzen in games. So IMO, it should be compared to both Z270 and X99

[The Sloth]

Just now, Zackbare said:

And I heard that Ryzen are difficult to optimize for ram and also for overclocking and stuff? Is it true somewhat? Will it be fixed?

wait 6 months to a year before judging a new platform. 

[Ya_Mi]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

More like 15-30FPS... Anyway, all X99 CPUs beat Ryzen in games. So IMO, it should be compared to both Z270 and X99

Well even if it is .. its already above playable framerates anyway..

and its a new CPU i am sure there will be an optimization to address this issues..

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Ya_Mi said:

Well even if it is .. its already above playable framerates anyway..

and its a new CPU i am sure there will be an optimization to address this issues..

But wouldn't it be a performance over money thing, that would be a mere wastage of money.

It's pricing should justify performance. Right?

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Ya_Mi said:

Well even if it is .. its already above playable framerates anyway..

and its a new CPU i am sure there will be an optimization to address this issues..

And it's more of a Architecture issue, which can't be addressed by updates ?

[PCGuy_5960]

3 minutes ago, Ya_Mi said:

Well even if it is .. its already above playable framerates anyway..

An enthusiast doesn't GAF about having "playable" FPS

3 minutes ago, Ya_Mi said:

and its a new CPU i am sure there will be an optimization to address this issues..

It is really hard.... Developers will have to make their games use up to 8 threads that belong to cores that are on the same CCX. I don't think that developers will update their games for that.... Newer games should have this though and I think that Ryzen will perform a bit better in upcoming games...

[Ya_Mi]

Just now, Zackbare said:

But wouldn't it be a performance over money thing, that would be a mere wastage of money.

It's pricing should justify performance. Right?

yeah i both hate and love that Charts.

Well Ryzen 8 and 7 is more like for content creator even Lisa Su said than in the Ryzen announcement.
But really Ryzen does not sucks for gaming..

Jayz did  a review on Ryzen 7.

Just now, Zackbare said:

And it's more of a Architecture issue, which can't be addressed by updates ?

I am not sure its an architecture issues though but well lets just wait a see

[PCGuy_5960]

2 minutes ago, Ya_Mi said:

But really Ryzen does not sucks for gaming..

Jayz did  a review on Ryzen 7.

Jay did not compare it to the 6900K or the 7700K, nobody said that Ryzen sucks for games. The only thing that people are saying is that you can find better CPUs if you are only gaming...

3 minutes ago, Ya_Mi said:

I am not sure its an architecture issues though but well lets just wait a see

It is. Check out PCPer's article on Ryzen's CCX latency....

[Ya_Mi]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

Jay did not compare it to the 6900K or the 7700K, nobody said that Ryzen sucks for games. The only thing that people are saying is that you can find better CPUs if you are only gaming...

It is. Check out PCPer's article on Ryzen's CCX latency....

I am just saiyan!!!

 

Yes true except those savages on reddit  

[WMGroomAK]

Just now, Zackbare said:

 

 

 

The  reason I ask this is that Ryzen has a CCX problem, which you can look up here for - https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/753642-amd-ryzen-r7-1800x-performance-review-techpowerup

or here https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/753672-ryzen-gaming-in-the-future/

 

AND also 

 

 

All new platforms have issues and growing pains...  In AMDs case you are seeing not just a new chipset but also a new micro-architecture, new for AMD 14nm process, and new design/layout.  These things always have issues which is why it is usually good to wait at least 6 months from launch prior to looking into benchmarks and purchasing of a new processor.  As for the CCX, I'm not too sure it is an issue with the actual design of the Core Complexes so much as an issue with the cross communication between these complexes on the Infinity Fabric.  My personal opinion is that the Infinity Fabric is a big plus for AMD but also has a downside.  It allows AMD to scale their processors a lot easier and will probably make their APU design and implementation a lot easier, however, they are definitely running into an issue in the Multi-CCX situation, where there is a degradation on performance on threads handed off between CCXes and one where threads are having to access L3 cache across CCX complexes. Some of this may be improved via software and firmware updates some may see improvement in the Zen2 and future Zen revisions.

[PCGuy_5960]

8 minutes ago, WMGroomAK said:

As for the CCX, I'm not too sure it is an issue with the actual design of the Core Complexes so much as an issue with the cross communication between these complexes on the Infinity Fabric.  My personal opinion is that the Infinity Fabric is a big plus for AMD but also has a downside.  It allows AMD to scale their processors a lot easier

Actually, this CCX design is what gives AMD the advantage in productivity applications.... However, this design also causes issues with gaming performance. If they used a "simple" 8 core design, Ryzen would perform better in games...

[SpaceGhostC2C]

16 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Jay did not compare it to the 6900K or the 7700K, nobody said that Ryzen sucks for games. 

Unfortunately, yes, many said it in this same forum, and the flame wars go on and on.

Luckily, there are also more sensible views, like the one you express here.

 

OP: the answer is no, you probably shouldn't compare them. Their prices are completely different. Their core count is completely different. I could understand it if that was the closest intel has to an 1800x, or the 1800x was the closest AMD has to a 7700K, but that isn't true either.

The reason why you will see many reviewers doing such comparisons is twofold, one part reasonable, one part absurd. The reasonable part is that many of those reviewers are focused on gaming only. My opinion is that they shouldn't review something like the 1800x if their interest is gaming, but if they do, they may provide the performance of the top gaming CPU as a reference. Unfortunately, doing this can be misleading to many people, the same way doing Xeon reviews comparing their gaming performance to a 7700K, or benching a Quadro in games, would be misleading, and you'll see examples of this in this forum as well.

The other, more random part of the reason is that they don't really know where to place it because intel logic  Intel has been trying to milk the market as much as they can by segmenting it into two platforms, while AMD will use a unified one. Hence, this CPUs fit in a socket that will later also accommodate more gaming-oriented chips. At the same time, a CPU like the 1800x is aimed at heavier workloads, something Intel reserves to the x99 platform. If the full Ryzen lineup was here, we could have reviewers more comfortably doing x99 vs R7 comparison, and then gaming chips vs Kaby Lake, etc. But in the current market, the R7s are the only AMD product we have, and the 1800x in particular doesn't align in terms of pricing with any intel chip. THey hesitate wether to put it against Intel's 8-core, which is twoce the price, or Intel's most closely priced CPUs, which are 6-cores, and then they realize the motherboard price difference and the secondary feature set, and say "well, maybe 'prosumer' or something" and compare it to the mainstream top dog.

 

All in all, if you look at 7700K vs 1800x:

- prices are completely different

- specs are completly different

- performance in games is considerably better for the 7700k

- performance in heavy CPU workloads is substantially better for the 1800x

 

Other than being sold in 2017, what do these 2 CPUs have in common?