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

[Lathais]

I think it is in the software devs court to blow our minds.

Yes and no. 4c+ CPUs need to become the norm before software devs will start making full use of them. It's in the CPU makers court to make these things more affordable and get them in the hands of consumers.

[SilverCoin]

I'm gonna' wait some weeks before I decide which CPU and so which MoBo will be the core of my new build. GTX 1080 ti is locked so some wait will be good here too since the custom designs should be rdy in 1 month or so if i'm not wrong. Maybe some optimization will help Ryzen. There is a Test where the 1700@3.9 almost beats 7700k @5 but dunno what specs this test used.

[Life-Binder]

https://www.computerbase.de/2017-03/...ll-e-witcher-3

ton of info in german

[kaelleria]

I'm gonna' wait some weeks before I decide which CPU and so which MoBo will be the core of my new build. GTX 1080 ti is locked so some wait will be good here too since the custom designs should be rdy in 1 month or so if i'm not wrong. Maybe some optimization will help Ryzen. There is a Test where the 1700@3.9 almost beats 7700k @5 but dunno what specs this test used.

That is literally the only test that gets anything like that. I wouldn't read to much into that particular review.

[Gray_Matter]

(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

You aren't comparing apples with apples there. Coffee Lake will undoubtedly be more complex and have more transistors than the 6900K. That will make it less OC'able. Also, you are welcome to spend the $1k plus on the CPU. Right now, the 1800X offers more than twice the price/performance compared to the 6900K. Coffee Lake isn't going to be cheaper than the 6900K.

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)

That means that they have some issues to sort out. Fixing them could give Ryzen a speed boost. Who's to know.

- - - Updated - - -

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.

They probably will have better clock speeds. They are also going to be more expensive.

I agree, though, it's up to the devs from now onwards because there are clearly some technical limitations that are preventing much more progress. Multi cores is the future. When they hit limitations there then it will be multi-processors. The devs needs to adapt. Unity and co need to be the ones to push that.

[Deleted]

That is literally the only test that gets anything like that. I wouldn't read to much into that particular review.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXVIPo_qbc4

I would say its hard to discredit with the side by side benchmarks.

[kaelleria]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXVIPo_qbc4

I would say its hard to discredit with the side by side benchmarks.

And yet if you're running a 1080p or 1440p monitor the performance tanks. When things aren't GPU bound like they are in that video, the Ryzen chips aren't coming close to the Intel chips...

Right now cards are bottlenecking 4k performance. In a year or so when cards don't bottleneck 4k performance you'll see similar disparities in perf at 4k that you see at 1080p.

Less than 5% of steam users run at resolutions over 1080p so the vast majority of people will be CPU bound rather than GPU bound, which is why the Joker review running at 4k is a bad representation of what the chips can actually do for most people.

[Artorius]

So apparently all Asus boards have problems with SMT for whatever reason. Setting Windows to "High Performance" mode also gives you an extra 5%~15% extra perf which was never the case with previous uarchs. I think we just need some time to learn all the weird stuff there is to be learned until AMD fixes their issues on their end, be it a software fix or a hardware one in their next iteration of Zen.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXVIPo_qbc4

I would say its hard to discredit with the side by side benchmarks.

The 1700 is a solid purchase the rest of Amd line overpriced though.

[Deleted]

And yet if you're running a 1080p or 1440p monitor the performance tanks. When things aren't GPU bound like they are in that video, the Ryzen chips aren't coming close to the Intel chips...

Right now cards are bottlenecking 4k performance. In a year or so when cards don't bottleneck 4k performance you'll see similar disparities in perf at 4k that you see at 1080p.

Less than 5% of steam users run at resolutions over 1080p so the vast majority of people will be CPU bound rather than GPU bound, which is why the Joker review running at 4k is a bad representation of what the chips can actually do for most people.

Eh, that video is 1080p...

[Life-Binder]

Coffee Lake isn't going to be cheaper than the 6900K.

- Coffee mainstream will be 6c, 6900k is 8c
- 6900k is HEDT (X99), Coffee will be ~Z370

your claim is beyond ridiculous

Coffee Lake will undoubtedly be more complex and have more transistors than the 6900K.

Coffee Lake is same arch and process (just more refined) as Skylake and Kaby

Multi cores is the future.

been hearing this mantra for 10 years now

and it is moving along .. veeery slowly .. buying an 8c/16t CPU now for gaming hoping it will get properly utilized within its lifespan in your mobo is incredibly dumb

I would say its hard to discredit with the side by side benchmarks.

theres 0 proof in that video that the left side is actually a Zen and not, say, an overclocked Intel 8c CPU

I dont mind Joker, but Im going to trust computerbase.de + PCPer + gamers nexus + legit reviews + guru3D + anandtech + tomshardware etc. over him alone

especially since he is claiming parity between a 3.9 1700 vs a ~5.0-5.1 7700K, thats an enormous 1100+ MHz difference, which means that in less multi-threaded games, in that video of his the 7700K should by definition be stomping the Zen even if Zen had the same gaming IPC as Kaby ...

[Fascinate]

Here is another thing that people rarely take into account:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mW1pzcdZxKc&t=165s

That review thrashes ryzen until you get to the 15:30 mark where he says all of the games play "incredibly smooth" on ryzen, also noting there can be stuttering found on a 7700k at times. Now boys what is more important, a FPS indicator or smooth gameplay? Who cares if you are getting 120 fps or 150 if the experience is good?

The more and more i think about this, 1700 is probably going into my rig.

[Deleted]

theres 0 proof in that video that the left side is actually a Zen and not, say, an overclocked Intel 8c CPU

The actual fuck, wut, thats a first for me reading such a thing on this sub forum.

[Life-Binder]

The actual fuck, wut, thats a first for me reading such a thing on this sub forum.

when his results differ so much from everyone else what should I be thinking ? he is trying to claim a 3.9 1700 basically never loses to a 5.0 7700K, at least in the games he tested .. a huge grain of salt there

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mW1pzcdZxKc this also shows different gaming results from Joker


P.S. I edited my prev post, see prev page

[kaelleria]

Here is another thing that people rarely take into account:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mW1pzcdZxKc&t=165s

That review thrashes ryzen until you get to the 15:30 mark where he says all of the games play "incredibly smooth" on ryzen, also noting there can be stuttering found on a 7700k at times. Now boys what is more important, a FPS indicator or smooth gameplay? Who cares if you are getting 120 fps or 150 if the experience is good?

The more and more i think about this, 1700 is probably going into my rig.

It's more expensive and reviews have been questionable so far with the majority showing worse performance in gaming. Other than brand loyalty, why bother with AMD at all right now? AMD isn't cheaper and doesn't have better performance.

At the very least you should wait a few weeks for them to fix the bugs they're experiencing.

when his results differ so much from everyone else what should I be thinking ? he is trying to claim a 3.9 1700 basically never loses to a 5.0 7700K, at least in the games he tested .. a huge grain of salt there

This is basically my thought... the AMD CEO even said they're going to work on 1080p gaming in an AMA today.

[Fascinate]

It's more expensive and reviews have been questionable so far with the majority showing worse performance in gaming. Other than brand loyalty, why bother with AMD at all right now?
At the very least you should wait a few weeks for them to fix the bugs they're experiencing.

The 1700 is actually cheaper than a 7700k (well unless you live near a microcenter). So far from the reviews the only thing i have taken from it is the 1700x and 1800x are not worth a buy, the 1700 for 329.00 is the CPU to get.

[Remilia]

Here is another thing that people rarely take into account:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mW1pzcdZxKc&t=165s

That review thrashes ryzen until you get to the 15:30 mark where he says all of the games play "incredibly smooth" on ryzen, also noting there can be stuttering found on a 7700k at times. Now boys what is more important, a FPS indicator or smooth gameplay? Who cares if you are getting 120 fps or 150 if the experience is good?

The more and more i think about this, 1700 is probably going into my rig.

It's actually something I never thought about, but using frame time analysis for CPU benchmarks aren't really common. Tends to only be for GPU benches.

The one benefit to having more cores is having more things in the background. It's a pretty noticeable thing for me when I've had 2-3 games going on at once before. Talking about having FFXIV, BnS and Warframe all going at once before. On the 2600 it was uhh... workable, but once the MoBo took a shit, going to the 5820k, even with just only 2c/4t more made a difference from my perspective.

[Life-Binder]

however the one thing I learned today for sure is that while 7700K is fast - you do want at least 6 cores for future-proofing, light multi-tasking, smoothness etc. (this was mostly from comparing 7700K to 6800K & 6900K rather than Zen though ^^ .. i actually think I spent more time doing that than comparing to Zen)

so yes, only a hexacore for next upgrade

I was somewhat underestimating Broadwell-E this whole time, can admit that



after today Im more looking forward to Skylake-X gaming tests than to 1600X .. no doubt it will be expensive as hell again, but still

[kaelleria]

The 1700 is actually cheaper than a 7700k (well unless you live near a microcenter). So far from the reviews the only thing i have taken from it is the 1700x and 1800x are not worth a buy, the 1700 for 329.00 is the CPU to get.

Compare the 1700 to the 7700
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...-727-_-Product
7700 - $314

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...-428-_-Product
1700 - $329. On sale... which ends Wednesday.

[Deleted]

when his results differ so much from everyone else what should I be thinking ? he is trying to claim a 3.9 1700 basically never loses to a 5.0 7700K, at least in the games he tested .. a huge grain of salt there

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mW1pzcdZxKc this also shows different gaming results from Joker


P.S. I edited my prev post, see prev page

Results vary yes, but to go as far as, he used an Intel CPU instead, its just daft, reviewers don't have anything to gain to show these results, the companies do, his channel will be over if hes caught cheating by using another part outright.

His channel survived pretty well without touching AMD CPUs prior to this so it wouldn't hurt him to not receive anything from AMD in this regard.

- - - Updated - - -

This is basically my thought... the AMD CEO even said they're going to work on 1080p gaming in an AMA today.

You claimed the video I linked was 4K dude, the results were in 1080 P.