AMD Zen processors...Are you interested?

[Fascinate]

AMD stock down 13% since the launch of Ryzen based on the terrible reviews towards gaming.

Means its a good time to buy.

[Kagthul]

The difference in FPS on my 4790k at 4.0 / 4.6 was only about 3-5. That was some extremely informal testing back MoP at old Ultra with a 970.

The primary benefit is actually to minimum frame rates, resulting in much smoother gameplay.

[Thunderball]

The primary benefit is actually to minimum frame rates, resulting in much smoother gameplay.

Judging from gaming test for Ryzen minimum FPS difference is much larger than average. So it should be the other way around. Apparently it has something to do with SMT implementation, so it's unclear if it can be fixed through optimization.

[Jimmy Thick]

Means its a good time to buy.

Nah, its getting dropped like a hot potato. Some shark investor just dumped 45 million shares, AMD is down to $12.91 if they don't fix the gaming part of Ryzen AMD stock will be on the pink sheets by the end of the year.

These big investors just don't dump stock for no good reason thats how they became big investors to begin with, they know when to hold on to something and patience, for someone to drop 45 million shares, thats an alarming red flag and probably not a good sign for AMD.

[BicycleMafioso]

Gaming on Ryzen is not an issue. Gaming on Ryzen goes quite well.
And the gaming crowd, although enthusiastic, is a minority.

Ryzen is a fantastic CPU architecture and this sounds like an amazing time to buy.

[Fascinate]

Nah, its getting dropped like a hot potato. Some shark investor just dumped 45 million shares, AMD is down to $12.91 if they don't fix the gaming part of Ryzen AMD stock will be on the pink sheets by the end of the year.

These big investors just don't dump stock for no good reason thats how they became big investors to begin with, they know when to hold on to something and patience, for someone to drop 45 million shares, thats an alarming red flag and probably not a good sign for AMD.

I am the guy who should be buying an intel rig right now if you buy into the reviews as most of my games are not multithreaded, yet i am still going to get a ryzen chip....

Its early days, the value proposition of the 1700 makes it a no brainer over the price competitive intel part.

[Jimmy Thick]

And the gaming crowd, although enthusiastic, is a minority.

Tell that to the investors dropping the stock, they seem to think gaming holds significant value.

The real judge will be AMD's quarterly earnings results, if they miss their goals, and they probably will, AMD could have trouble and hit the pink sheets.

Pink sheets, not good.

[Artorius]

Some things now that some of the new BIOSes are better and some new info in general:
- The performance difference between "balanced" and "high performance" is now apparently irrelevant. Small to the point of being inside the margin of error.
- Not sure if The Stilt was just using a really old build of Windows 10, but he's reporting way better performance under Windows 7. Specially when it comes to gaming performance with SMT turned on. On Windows 7 there's no real regression while Windows 10 shows a performance deficit (it's only really that big on Warhammer). People are asking him to apply all Windows 10 updates and retest it to see if it makes a difference.
- Problems with RAM are still a thing. Try to ignore this guy's hair and watch the whole video, if you've been out of the loop it is a very nice compressed version of Ryzen's launch so far.

[BicycleMafioso]

Tell that to the investors dropping the stock, they seem to think gaming holds significant value.

Sure, give me their numbers. I'll tell them what complete morons they are if they think Ryzen is bad at gaming and if they think gaming is > all.

[apepi]

Sure, give me their numbers. I'll tell them what complete morons they are if they think Ryzen is bad at gaming and if they think gaming is > all.

I mean they should make great severs and great workstations doing videos and etc. Gaming might not use all the cores but actual professional work does.

[Fascinate]

I am actually surprised how hyped i am for ryzen even given the gaming results so far. I think most people just dont realize how much value for money you are getting with the 1700 particularly when compared to a 7700k. You can get a 1700 and b350 motherboard for 400 dollars once the boards start going on sales (and they will) and with the included stock cooler you can hit a all core overclock of 3.8ghz with AMD's ryzen master software (i mention this because most people are more comfortable with windows actions than going into a uefi).

Dont get me wrong if you can wait til ryzen v2 you should, its going to be higher clockrates for sure, but if you have the money now and are in need of an upgrade a 1700 build is easily the best decision anyone can make if you were contemplating an i7 to begin with. I can only come up with one scenario in my mind where someone would benefit from a 7700k, professional CS:GO players who think they can see 500 fps over 400 fps. And hey if that placibo effect gets you more kills, by all means : )

[Jimmy Thick]

Sure, give me their numbers. I'll tell them what complete morons they are if they think Ryzen is bad at gaming and if they think gaming is > all.

For starters try the Mubadala Development Company PJSC who just dumped 45 million shares.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/amd...of2&yptr=yahoo


And while you're talking to them tell them to invest in Disney, Apple and Home Depot so I can retire soon please.

[Thunderball]

Sure, give me their numbers. I'll tell them what complete morons they are if they think Ryzen is bad at gaming and if they think gaming is > all.

Ryzen is bad at gaming for it's price and yes, gaming enthusiasts are the main consumer category for performance processors.

[Artorius]

The 1700 almost makes the entire X99 platform pointless. There are only extremely few use case scenarios in which going X99 offers significantly better performance now, and the price difference between the two is simply too huge to make it worth it. The 6950X, which is still meaningfully better due to having 2 extra cores, costs $1,627.99 right now on Amazon. You literally pay more than 5x the price for a 30% performance increase at best which is honestly borderline retarded from a perf/$ PoV.

[Thunderball]

The 1700 almost makes the entire X99 platform pointless. There are only extremely few use case scenarios in which going X99 offers significantly better performance now, and the price difference between the two is simply too huge to make it worth it. The 6950X, which is still meaningfully better due to having 2 extra cores, costs $1,627.99 right now on Amazon. You literally pay more than 5x the price for a 30% performance increase at best which is honestly borderline retarded from a perf/$ PoV.

Just buy Ryzen and stop advertising it. Seriously dude. It's pretty clear at this point what it is good for, stop trying to make people think that's good for everything else.

[Artorius]

Just buy Ryzen and stop advertising it. Seriously dude. It's pretty clear at this point what it is good for, stop trying to make people think that's good for everything else.

I'm discussing hardware in a forum with people who want to discuss hardware. It's pretty clear that you aren't one of those, and if it bothers you just ignore it. I'm not advertising it, what I'm telling is literally what anyone who benchmarked it in literally anything that isn't a game would tell you to. I don't really know why you think the current gaming performance difference in CPU-bound scenarios is more meaningful than anything else, and if you had read the last few pages you would've seen that we've wrote here several times that it obviously can't match Intel's mainstream offerings when it comes to it for obvious reasons even if all the problems were fixed (one of them is the ~7% IPC difference and the other one is the clock difference). If you're trying to do 240Hz 1080p gaming then sure go grab a 7700K, that's the recommendation. There's no reason to go with a 6900K either. You don't need to be a genius to understand that draw call performance is CPU-bound on low resolutions and that Kaby Lake can feed the GPU faster for it to do its job. Ryzen SKUs can barely clock at 4.2GHz on air, Kaby Lake ones can at 5GHz.

It is a CPU with 8 cores, its nearby competitor is the 6900K and that's what should be compared to it despite the price difference. Different products for different tasks, I'm not trying to make people think Ryzen is good for everything else. I don't need to do it even if I wanted to, Ryzen is pretty decent in basically anything that you can throw at it and the benchmarks show it. I'm in the engineering field, I deal with hardware on a daily basis because I simply love doing it and I like to know what's happening, where's the bottleneck, what can be improved, etc. I care about the technology and I care about how the end result is achieved, if Ryzen as a product was indeed a flop and just another Bulldozer then I would be telling it and pointing out all of its problems the same way I'm doing with Ryzen. I don't work for AMD, I don't own AMD stock, I don't really gain anything tangible by lying to people. What I do though might help them make a better purchase, and if what I post can help someone, a single person, then that's already more than enough to keep doing it. There's absolutely no indications of any bugs in the CPU itself so far, and software problems can always be fixed. It's just software, you can rewrite it and you can ship it to consumers very efficiently.

In fact I have a hard time trying to understand why some of you display so much hatred towards AMD in general and towards this launch. It's a new uarch, a new platform and they basically had to redo their entire stack in 4 months to launch it now, problems were expected and they'll be ironed out. That's not an exclusive thing from AMD, Intel has problems in their launches too (Kaby Lake to this day still has the prime numbers bug as far as I remember, it literally freezes and crashes the system doing it. X99 was full of bugs when it was released, and obviously they were all fixed over time.). Sure, if I were in charge of deciding when to launch this I would've postponed the initial launch by 1 or 2 months to give extra time to the manufacturers to at least have most of the stuff working perfectly. Waiting for everything to be perfect would be impractical, AMD would need to wait too much and they need a new product in the shelves.

[Fascinate]

I honestly dont get the hate for ryzen. They are offering you a 8 core 16 thread CPU that is a perfectly capable gaming cpu as well for 330 bucks, that can overclock on sub 100 dollar motherboards (x99 boards START at 200).

In time you guys bashing ryzen will understand how good of a product this is for the money. Its basically sandy bridge v2, its an absolute game changer.

Remember guys i havent owned an AMD product in ages, and have never been so excited about a PC upgrade.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

Just buy Ryzen and stop advertising it. Seriously dude. It's pretty clear at this point what it is good for, stop trying to make people think that's good for everything else.

No kidding. Not to mention I don't understand how people are so thrilled the next generation chip managed to beat out the flagship of the other guy that has been around and on the market for a long time. I see no real race until I see both sides next generation. That is when both sides are aware and directly competing instead of one guys older platform being edged out by the other guys newer platform they specifically targeted to barely edge out. What a huge shocker.

[Deleted]

I want to see WoW benchmarks. I dont know why people dont use that game in their benchmarks, its totally relevant still.

Thats my worry, getting mine and seeing it perform badly in WoW. Thats the main game I play so if it dos not do so good Im going to beat up Fascinate for talking me into this..and Gray Matter too!

Anyone find a review where they disable 2 cores for comparison to the 1600X, I looked this morning but no joy. If these thing turn out decent then a 4/8 core for the HTPC is going to happen and I been sporting 3rd generation Pentiums in my 3 office machines. I almost bought some 4560s and b250 boards but I'll wait for the R3s

Most reviewers aren't gamers, those youtube tech channels, most are not gamers which is why they barely run in game play throughs and focus on other type of tests, I highly doubt any one of them has played WoW properly so have no idea how to approach the game, mean most of them still run their benchmarks on old titles...

[BicycleMafioso]

Ryzen is bad at gaming for it's price and yes, gaming enthusiasts are the main consumer category for performance processors.

Its, not it's.

It is, however, better for gaming than Broadwell-E unless you specifically want 3 or more GPUs -- which no one would want.
You are also incorrect. Gamers buy mainstream mid-segmented CPUs most often, while the prosumers are the ones who most commonly buy high-end performance processors.

Ryzen is about the same as Haswell refresh in gaming with improvements coming. How anyone think their performance is objectively bad in gaming is stupefying.
People are very excited about Ryzen and for good reasons.