It's official. Eight-core Ryzen 7 chips will start at just $329.

[aarro]

- - - Updated - - -



No, not really. You'd be looking at a side grade really, minor improvement at best. I'd guesstimate about a 5-15% increase, but hard to say until third party benchmarks come out. If you already have a CPU that is less than 4-5 years old, unless you really need more cores for something, these are not really worth upgrading to IMO. It's neat and interesting and new, but if you already have something that's close to it's performance, it's not worth an upgrade really.

Really? I'm sure my i7-4820k is about 3 or 4 years old now, I'd have thought the CPU's today would be way ahead performance wise.

[Artorius]

Really? I'm sure my i7-4820k is about 3 or 4 years old now, I'd have thought the CPU's today would be way ahead performance wise.

They are. They simply aren't consumer grade products. Intel didn't need to make their consumer grade desktop offerings better, all the improvements are extremely small improvements apart from the node changes. And even the improvements that come from a better manufacturing process are mostly useless in the desktop space too because they were never trying to better utilise the area headroom, they were just making it smaller so they could have more CPUs per wafer and therefore higher profit margins. The switch from Planar to FinFET hurt clockspeeds for a while, but now they're back to where they were before or even slightly better. The real improvements are in their mobile lineup with insane perf/watt compared to what we had in the past, and in the server lineup since they can put more cores and larger cache, while the workload there is incredibly parallel.

If you want to know what really improved in their desktop lineup, look at the iGPU performance. And it'll probably get better in a faster pace in the next following products since they signed that contract with AMD. They could theoretically increase the performance/area by almost ~200% if they had access to everything, which they probably don't but we'll see.

[Lathais]

Really? I'm sure my i7-4820k is about 3 or 4 years old now, I'd have thought the CPU's today would be way ahead performance wise.

Yeah, really. Each generation from intel really only offers a very small increase in performance at the consumer level. The i5-2500k, which is about 5 years old now, is really only about 10-15% behind intels current i5's. Ryzen will be about on par with intel finally, but that still does not make it worth upgrading to just like it's not worth it to upgrade to intels current offerings. Anyone with any sort of current CPU, meaning from the last 5 years or so, unless they just need more cores for whatever it is they are doing, should not really be considering upgrading to this.

[Djuntas]

By now, who cares about these tiny CPU increases since 2010...We have reached the point where we just cant make things smaller / transistors. Bring on Quantum computing

[aarro]

Yeah, really. Each generation from intel really only offers a very small increase in performance at the consumer level. The i5-2500k, which is about 5 years old now, is really only about 10-15% behind intels current i5's. Ryzen will be about on par with intel finally, but that still does not make it worth upgrading to just like it's not worth it to upgrade to intels current offerings. Anyone with any sort of current CPU, meaning from the last 5 years or so, unless they just need more cores for whatever it is they are doing, should not really be considering upgrading to this.

yea I don't stream or video edit, I just game a lot.

[Lathais]

yea I don't stream or video edit, I just game a lot.

Then your CPU is already way overkill for what you need then. It's an i7 on X79 platform, you could have gone with an i5 on Zxx platform and had the same gaming performance.

[Life-Binder]

no it wont

1700X/1800X right now from what we see so far have ~parity with stock 3.7Ghz 6900K (a bit below it in ST, equal or a bit above in MT)

7900K will be > 6900K, so 7900K will be > 1800X .. thats before we factor in OC potential where I am favoring the Skylake too

[aarro]

Then your CPU is already way overkill for what you need then. It's an i7 on X79 platform, you could have gone with an i5 on Zxx platform and had the same gaming performance.

It was a pre-build system so I didn't go out and specifically get that CPU. All good though, I can keep my money saved for a little while longer

[Evildeffy]

1700X/1800X right now from what we see so far have ~parity with stock 3.7Ghz 6900K (a bit below it in ST, equal or a bit above in MT)

7900K will be > 6900K, so 7900K will be > 1800X .. thats before we factor in OC potential where I am favoring the Skylake too

As far as IPC goes, I know it's still conjecture but here:
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-1700x-...kaby-lake-ipc/

To note Broadwell and Skylake are on average 3% apart on IPC, the only advantage Skylake has is clockspeed.
Therefore I would still call it even on clockspeed and OC potential is unknown so far.

[Deleted]

The awkard moment where you foolish bought in the past a fx 8320 and now you casually stalk the thread, hoping to find a vfm cpu without getting burned again :-P

[Artorius]

OC potential is unknown so far.

They got it to ~5.14GHz on LN2 when they broke cinebench's world record.

[Fascinate]

They got it to ~5.14GHz on LN2 when they broke cinebench's world record.

They are looking to be very terrible overclockers actually, from
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/th...#post-30533503

We just tested a 1700, it hit 4.0GHz stable in everything, but ONLY in the Crosshair mainboard, the lower-end boards it was hovering around 3.80GHz as the VRM’s were cooking with extra voltage. It however was maxing around 4050MHz, so I’d say 1700 can do 3.9-4.1GHz, of course the 1800X will probably do 4.1-4.3 as no doubt better binned, but if your clocking the motherboard has a big impact on the overclock and so far Asus Crosshair and Asrock Taichi seem the best two.

They basically dont overclock, 200-300mhz seems the most you are ever going to get....with massive power consumption increases. Simply not worth if these people can be trusted.

[DeltrusDisc]

They are looking to be very terrible overclockers actually, from
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/th...#post-30533503



They basically dont overclock, 200-300mhz seems the most you are ever going to get....with massive power consumption increases. Simply not worth if these people can be trusted.

... Please don't let this be the sign of another flop from AMD. The fact anyone is still giving them a chance is very hard to comprehend, but I think if they flop much more, they will literally become history.

[Fascinate]

My purchase completely hinges on how well they overclock, cores are nice but i also demand a decent single core boost over my 2500k and thats only possible if they get to ~4.5ghz range, but its not looking good so far.

[Vash The Stampede]

My purchase completely hinges on how well they overclock, cores are nice but i also demand a decent single core boost over my 2500k and thats only possible if they get to ~4.5ghz range, but its not looking good so far.

That depends on which CPU you buy. I wouldn't expect the 1700 to overclock to 4.5Ghz, cause why buy the 1700X or 1800X? But the 1800X has reached 5.2Ghz if that matters to anyone. I don't expect those chips to hit 5Ghz, let alone 5.2Ghz, unless the silicon lottery gods smile upon you and you have a cooler able to achieve -200c.

I believe a lot of people are going to buy the 1700's and expect 4.5Ghz, but that's just not going to be the case. With RyZen, AMD has taken the lottery out of silicon lottery. If you want good overclock potential then you need to buy the 1800X.

[Life-Binder]

so far nothing indicates even 1800X will hit 4.5 on air/water for 24/7 stable/gaming use

but we'll see

[Fascinate]

Duke that is on liquid nitrogen lol. Its looking quite grim for overclocking so far, at least on the 8 cores.

[Evildeffy]

They got it to ~5.14GHz on LN2 when they broke cinebench's world record.

I don't mean on LN2, I mean proper cooling wise.

[Gorgodeus]

They are looking to be very terrible overclockers actually, from
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/th...#post-30533503



They basically dont overclock, 200-300mhz seems the most you are ever going to get....with massive power consumption increases. Simply not worth if these people can be trusted.

Saying something does not overclock well, based on results from shitty boards is quite stupid. The X series chips appear to very overclockable.

[warrdaddy]

Sold my i7-6700k and I will pre order the 1700x. The wait has paid off!

Good job, you will see such a uuugggee performance gain, you will be blown away. Patience isn't what I would say they quality you possess.

On a serious note, I guarantee that intel already has something in the pipeline that they have been holding out on releasing (hence multiple took releases on 14nm)... so give it a year...

Also, I have 6700k, upgraded from 2500k, wat a waste of money