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

[Life-Binder]

7600K is easily at least 20%+ faster across the board in games than either a 2500K or a 1700

probably more like 25-30% faster

[Remilia]

Kind of exactly what I expected it to be with some workloads favoring one or the other architecture. Though the SMT bug for games is a shame. Somehow not that unexpected due to the nature of SMT, but still a shame.

That said, the 'fake benchmarks'. It may not have been at the time really.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11170/...1700x-and-1700

It is worth noting that Intel, as you would expect any competitor, went through each open source project AMD had used an implemented updates to assist dead/bad code (e.g. coalescing read/writes to comply with AMD/Intel design guidelines) or offer improvements (adding in 256-bit vector codes to combine consecutive 128-bit compute*), which is why some of the results from the launch today are different from what AMD has shown. (If anyone thinks this is ‘unfair’, it begs a bigger question as to how IPC is a good measure of performance if the code is IPC limiting itself, which is a topic for another day.)

[Clozer]

I would love to see amd get really good processors out, pressure Intel as much as possible. Competition is good for everyone.

Though all setups where i used amd processors got some kind of lags and stability issues, something i've never had with Intel's ships.

So even if some kind of benchmark shows that amd is 1% better and 200$ cheaper than intel.. i would still go for Intel.

[Life-Binder]

7600K is easily at least 20%+ faster across the board in games than either a 2500K or a 1700

probably more like 25-30% faster

heh

actually almost ~80% faster in this bench (stock 7600K vs stock 2500K)

[Fascinate]

Either way it looks like im finally due for an upgrade, 2500k has been good to me tho

I cant wait til we see reviews of the 1700 on b350 boards and more sample sizes to see what most 1700's hit. Even if its a 3.8-3.9 all core overclock, that is seriously appealing for ~400 dollars (b350 boards can be had for 80 bucks ish).

Still havent made my decision fully, because the game benchmarks are literally all over the place, its simply too early.

[Deleted]

heh

actually almost ~80% faster in this bench (stock 7600K vs stock 2500K)

Depends on the game you play. GTX 980 with a 7700k averages at 40fps. With a 2500k at 37fps. Not foreget the headroom the 2500k has for OCing.

Most games aren't that CPU reliant, so you need only worry about bottle-necking your GFX card.

[Gray_Matter]

And if Intel has big enough market share and starts dropping prices with the intent of pushing AMD out of market, they'll face competetion sanctions in the billions

I agree. I am just saying that they could easily afford to do it, financially speaking.

[Vash The Stampede]

7600K is easily at least 20%+ faster across the board in games than either a 2500K or a 1700

probably more like 25-30% faster

20% isn't enough to upgrade.

heh

actually almost ~80% faster in this bench (stock 7600K vs stock 2500K)

You don't own a 2500k and keep it stock clocks. If you do, then yes upgrade.

[Gray_Matter]

that Coffee Lake 6c looking better every day though

I am not so sure. What this says to me is that these guys are running into serious technical issues squeezing more from the CPU's. If I am not mistaken, Coffee Lake is all about more cores. They are going to run into the same issues. That means what I said earlier is more true. There isn't going to be any more big gains on single core. It's at the pinnacle. The gains are going to be adding multiple cores. AMD will also likely be much more competitive with their quad core offerings in the future. I am not sure if they are going to put out a dual core down the line but I don't think it would make sense. Won't be able to price it high enough to make decent money to cover the development costs.

[Celadir]

More that I don't have the need to upgrade is making me a sad panda. Would have loved to have seen some massive performance gains with Ryzen. Which would have given me the excuse to spend more money.

Coming from a FX 8350, I'm getting massive performance improvement and as a bonus I'm getting exceptional computing power for other software I run. Just my scenario.

[Life-Binder]

I am not so sure

well I am

7700K is already blazing fast in games/single-thread/OC etc.

Coffee is basically (hopefully) going to be a ~7700K with 2c/4t more


exactly what will serve as my gaming CPU for the next 4+ or so years

[Gimlinn]

and yet Intel will release something in another month that puts these to shame once again

[Jtbrig7390]

Its a strong showing by AMD, Rizen wasn't ment to outright beat intel.

Now fans of AMD have a strong CPU choice.

[Life-Binder]

saw this on reddit lol

no offence to anyone, peace ^^

Official AMD excuse list:

-Games and apps aren't optimized yet
-It's clearly a driver issue
-Wait for BIOS updates
-I like to play games with 300 browser tabs and Photoshop open
-Just wait for DX12
-Most games are GPU limited anyway
-Things will clearly work better on the motherboard I ordered instead of the one in the review
-People haven't figured out how to overclocking these yet
-What really matters is [pick any game that wasn't included in the review]
-These are great for "office work"
-Intel has been ripping people off for years, so I'm buying a slower CPU to support AMD
-I encode Blu Rays 14 hours a day, delete those, then encode them again
-The CPU will last longer in the future when programs support more threads

[Jimmy Thick]

Haw haw.

I admit, I was jumping on the AMD hype train as I really want the so desperately to succeed, but all they produced after seeing some real world benches by the average Joe Blow is just an updated version of the FX line.

Multiple cores and threads that should appeal to people running video editing equipment and absolutely nothing for serious gamers.

You know, AMD could be the leader in producing top flight budget/value gaming components but are so trying too hard to be taken seriously as a threat to Intel and they clearly will never be. They fucking made Intel drop their CPU prices but after this round of terrible gaming benchmarks and hard to OC silicon lottery CPU reviews, if I was Intel, I would jack up their prices to more than they had them with a tag line, " Come to the best or get stuck with FX again..."

Embarrassing.


Jimmy Thick-AMD is dead, long live Intel.

[Gray_Matter]

well I am

7700K is already blazing fast in games/single-thread/OC etc.

Coffee is basically (hopefully) going to be a ~7700K with 2c/4t more


exactly what will serve as my gaming CPU for the next 4+ or so years

If they add more cores then they will run into the same issues. Less OC.

[Ravenblade]

From what I've seen Ryzen is struggling a lot with SMT in games. Switching it off apparently boosts performance. Overall the only reason why you'd want one right now is because you hate Intel, your Intel CPU is disgustingly old or you are an owner of the previous AMD generation, or because you doing a lot of HPC work on the side and don't want to throw a lot of cash at it. For gaming purposes there seems to be no real gain. I suppose the R5 will be a lot better for price-performance ratio. For me however this looks like my 2600K will have to serve a bit longer. Never had a CPU this long in my computer! Even when I was strapped for cash the least I did was trying to keep up with the need of CPU speed.

[Fascinate]

I am in a spot where i kind of need to build right now otherwise the tax returns will just whither away and ill spend on more ridiculous things lol. Even after these reviews, i think i am still going to buy a r7 1700....but not sure on motherboard yet. Its basically the same cost as a 7700k and mobo, but 1ghz less clock speeds and twice the cores. For someone who plays mostly blizzard titles it probably sounds ridiculous i am even considering AMD, but i think if i picked the 7700k i would regret it in a couple years.

[Life-Binder]

If they add more cores then they will run into the same issues. Less OC.

(1) Coffee uses an improved 14nm++ process over Kabys 14nm+, hopefully that helps
(2) Kaby aready has ~5.0 Ghz, theres room to drop down some from that to get 6c/12t and still keep high single core performance


the 6900K (& 6800K/6850K) already OC better than R7, it will only widen with 6c Skylake-X & 6c Coffee vs R5 1600X

From what I've seen Ryzen is struggling a lot with SMT in games. Switching it off apparently boosts performance

yeah, gamers nexus did that

it improved but still gets beat by a bunch of Intel CPUs (or just manages to equal a stock ~7600K now, whereas with SMT it even lost to 7600K a bunch)

[Afrospinach]

If they add more cores then they will run into the same issues. Less OC.

Remind me but coffee lake is going to be on the same process again, which means they will probably have better clock speeds all around. I am however expecting another snoozefest. Desktop CPU is dead, for now. I think it is in the software devs court to blow our minds.