AMD Zen processors...Are you interested?

[Afrospinach]

Meh, i don't even know why i try anymore lol.

I bet a lot of people reading this thread are wondering the same thing. Trying to make a point over a special use case isn't really massive redemption. Also remember you are posting in a gaming forum.

This is all I have to say about the multithreadapocalypse:



I am certain I will be content with 4c/4t in a mere "couple" of years(maybe even the very processor I am using right now lol). As long as laptops exist and are outselling desktops you should also perhaps come to terms with that concept.

Sincerely, AMD has failed to impress. I have no issues waiting out cannon lake with my 3570k and hell I don't have high hopes for that one either.

[Fascinate]

Then state what mean you said the 1600x.
I feel at this point you're defending your AMD purchase and no amount of argument will budge you on gaming performance. So I'm going to meet you halfway here and say Ryzen's gaming performance is good, Intel's is better and Intel's multi-threaded application performance is good, but Ryzen's is better. I'm not arguing with a wall anymore. Good day Sir.

I dont need to justify anything lol. I get the feeling people who read this thread think i am in some way unhappy with my purchase, that couldnt be farther from the truth. What frustrations you saw were me seeing my ryzen playing one game (wow) slower than my 2500k, which turned out to be 100% because of the power plan i was using that works terribly in combination with ryzen processors. Since then AMD has come out with a new balanced power plan and now i am seeing numbers more in line with what i expected

I have watched a ton of gul dan fights on youtube, even people with super high clocked i7's are getting similar FPS to my 3.8ghz 1700, difference is i could be streaming/watching youtube/pron/encoding videos all at the same time lol.

People really need to understand that going forward ryzen is the smarter purchase, its not about "ryzen is better if you stream or do youtube" its about the fact that once games start being coded better for multithreaded processors the amount of idle cpu resources ryzen is going to have over i5's alone is going to make minimum FPS and overall system smoothness a thing.

Bolded cause no one mentions this in reviews sadly.

One of the better youtube channels telling people in the title of the video not to buy an i5:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71UHFJjs3Go

Just a matter of time before you guys see the light

[Lathais]

If you want to game your only choice is still Intel.

That being said, for $189 the 1500x is a fucking outstanding budget CPU coupled with a GTX 1060. From early benches it outperforms the 1600X in a lot of games. I would rather have a I5 7600k but budget builds should begin and end with the 1500X.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/31868...pu.html?page=3

Yeah, those 6c/12t Ryzen CPUs are getting beat pretty bad aren't they. Keep in mind, most devs have not optimized for Ryzen yet. When Oxide optimized AoS for Ryzen they got a massive 20% increase in FPS on Ryzen. If other games do that to, which they will as AMD has the console market pretty much cornered so games will HAVE to be optimized for Ryzen, then the Ryzen's will start to pull ahead, as they did in AoS.

[Jimmy Thick]

http://www.pcworld.com/article/31868...pu.html?page=3

Yeah, those 6c/12t Ryzen CPUs are getting beat pretty bad aren't they. Keep in mind, most devs have not optimized for Ryzen yet. When Oxide optimized AoS for Ryzen they got a massive 20% increase in FPS on Ryzen. If other games do that to, which they will as AMD has the console market pretty much cornered so games will HAVE to be optimized for Ryzen, then the Ryzen's will start to pull ahead, as they did in AoS.

Wow, Ryzen managed to get a whole one frame per second over the I5, color me impressed. Hopefully other game developers will pour more development dollars into their old game catalogues to optimize for Ryzen instead of trying to push the envelope with new products. Seems like a win win if I can get a Ryzen optimized version of Daikatana or even better Depression Quest.

I also eagerly await a Ryzen optimized version of the new Zelda game, I hope it fixes the drawn in issues. Love those console ports.


Or I can just continue to use an Intel CPU and not have to wait for that optimization patch.

[Bigvizz]

I dont need to justify anything lol. I get the feeling people who read this thread think i am in some way unhappy with my purchase, that couldnt be farther from the truth. What frustrations you saw were me seeing my ryzen playing one game (wow) slower than my 2500k, which turned out to be 100% because of the power plan i was using that works terribly in combination with ryzen processors. Since then AMD has come out with a new balanced power plan and now i am seeing numbers more in line with what i expected

I have watched a ton of gul dan fights on youtube, even people with super high clocked i7's are getting similar FPS to my 3.8ghz 1700, difference is i could be streaming/watching youtube/pron/encoding videos all at the same time lol.

People really need to understand that going forward ryzen is the smarter purchase, its not about "ryzen is better if you stream or do youtube" its about the fact that once games start being coded better for multithreaded processors the amount of idle cpu resources ryzen is going to have over i5's alone is going to make minimum FPS and overall system smoothness a thing.

Bolded cause no one mentions this in reviews sadly.

One of the better youtube channels telling people in the title of the video not to buy an i5:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71UHFJjs3Go

Just a matter of time before you guys see the light

I will always have my own opinion seeing the light will be based on that, so that last excerpt is nonsense.
You are and you will continue to argue based on your purchase, I frankly don't care about your opinion. So this will be my last reply in this cancer ridden thread.

[Fascinate]

You are and you will continue to argue based on your purchase, I frankly don't care about your opinion. So this will be my last reply in this cancer ridden thread.

I am trying to enlighten people on the fence why i believe ryzen to be the smarter purchase in 2017 over what intel offers in the same price bracket, and you are doing what again?

Of course i will argue for my purchase because i feel it is the correct one, what an odd comment...

[Lathais]

Wow, Ryzen managed to get a whole one frame per second over the I5, color me impressed. Hopefully other game developers will pour more development dollars into their old game catalogues to optimize for Ryzen instead of trying to push the envelope with new products. Seems like a win win if I can get a Ryzen optimized version of Daikatana or even better Depression Quest.

I also eagerly await a Ryzen optimized version of the new Zelda game, I hope it fixes the drawn in issues. Love those console ports.


Or I can just continue to use an Intel CPU and not have to wait for that optimization patch.

If you are buying a CPU today to play old games, then you are doing it wrong. Old games will run fine on Ryzen, just look, without optimizations, easily over 60FPS. When you buy a CPU you should be thinking about how it will be running games 3-4 years from now. The Ryaen CPUs appear as if they will be, at the very least, keeping up with intel, if not beating it since games coming out at that time will already be optimized for Ryzen.

Yeah, if you have a semi-recent CPU right now, no reason to go out and buy a Ryzen, I certainly am not. However, I may be building my daughter a PC for her Birthday in the next 3-4 months or so and when I am finally ready to upgrade my CPU in a few years and Ryzen has been further refined, it will definitely be a consideration. For someone who has a 2500k or older who is considering an upgrade, Ryzen is almost a no-brainer at this point.

Again, no one is saying to rush out and replace your 3xxx+ series intel with a Ryzen right now. If you have a 3xxx+ or newer intel CPU, you should not be considering an upgrade at all really. If you are in the market for a new PC or an upgrade at this time though, it's definitely something to think about, really hard, because in the coming years, new games that come out will be optimized for Ryzen.

- - - Updated - - -

I will always have my own opinion seeing the light will be based on that, so that last excerpt is nonsense.
You are and you will continue to argue based on your purchase, I frankly don't care about your opinion. So this will be my last reply in this cancer ridden thread.

If he is arguing on his purchase, what am I arguing on? I pretty much always disagree with Fascinate. We butt heads all the time. He's simply right here.

[Beazy]

Man Im still on the fence about an i5 or a Ryzen. I just dont know what to do. . . . maybe I'll save my money for next year around April and see where were at then.

I think a lot of you have good arguments for both processors. Its making it hard to make up my mind. Im still using an old i7-950.

[ovm33]

Man Im still on the fence about an i5 or a Ryzen. I just dont know what to do. . . . maybe I'll save my money for next year around April and see where were at then.

I think a lot of you have good arguments for both processors. Its making it hard to make up my mind. Im still using an old i7-950.

It depends mostly on what you play I think. Intel has a strangle hold on WoW. Their IPC is simply superior.

If you're primarily an WoW player then the i5 7600k is going to be be your best bet for performance. If you play primarily wow with a quick jaunt to some Witcher 3 / Ghost Recon / etc then I would get the i7 7700k.

If you play a lot of Triple A titles and console ports and only a little WoW then Ryzen becomes a lot more attractive. A lot more. If you only play triple A games then go for Ryzen if you want to eek out a year or two more from your chip.

The speed at which developers start leveraging more cores is... going slow to say the least. I think 4c / 8t is going to become the new sweet spot in the average lifetime of any CPU being released right now. I'm not convinced that 6c / 12t or 8c / 16t is going to be needed anytime soon.

[Arbiter]

I own a 4790K and I'm perfectly happy with it, but god damn the amount of Intel fanboyism going on right now is ridiculous. You can't call it anything but fanboyism if you can sit here and claim that Intel's options are the only CPUs worth buying still.

Ryzen 5 is bringing pretty small losses in single threaded performance for huge multithreaded gains at fantastic prices. How can anyone possibly argue with the option?

[Barnabas]

It depends mostly on what you play I think. Intel has a strangle hold on WoW. Their IPC is simply superior.

If you're primarily an WoW player then the i5 7600k is going to be be your best bet for performance. If you play primarily wow with a quick jaunt to some Witcher 3 / Ghost Recon / etc then I would get the i7 7700k.

If you play a lot of Triple A titles and console ports and only a little WoW then Ryzen becomes a lot more attractive. A lot more. If you only play triple A games then go for Ryzen if you want to eek out a year or two more from your chip.

The speed at which developers start leveraging more cores is... going slow to say the least. I think 4c / 8t is going to become the new sweet spot in the average lifetime of any CPU being released right now. I'm not convinced that 6c / 12t or 8c / 16t is going to be needed anytime soon.

Depends on if more people that make games move away from using game engines like unity when they go into production? It's a good platform to demo games on but the engine sucks ass. Game engines like cobra are the future. They can mutlithread with ease with no loss of functions.

- - - Updated - - -

I own a 4790K and I'm perfectly happy with it, but god damn the amount of Intel fanboyism going on right now is ridiculous. You can't call it anything but fanboyism if you can sit here and claim that Intel's options are the only CPUs worth buying still.

Ryzen 5 is bringing pretty small losses in single threaded performance for huge multithreaded gains at fantastic prices. How can anyone possibly argue with the option?

Because if you do anything with your computer besides play games all day you are weird.

[Life-Binder]

https://techreport.com/news/31719/ru...e-to-late-june

Rumor: Intel pulls X299 and Skylake-X release to late June

cant wait for 6c/8c gaming benchmarks .. for science

[Lathais]

I own a 4790K and I'm perfectly happy with it, but god damn the amount of Intel fanboyism going on right now is ridiculous. You can't call it anything but fanboyism if you can sit here and claim that Intel's options are the only CPUs worth buying still.

Ryzen 5 is bringing pretty small losses in single threaded performance for huge multithreaded gains at fantastic prices. How can anyone possibly argue with the option?

I don't know that it is so much fanboyism as it is just a hate for AMD. If there were other options on the market, would they still be as loyal to intel, or only hate on AMD and praise the other options. AMD has made some pretty major mistakes in the past and I can't blame people for not trusting them after Bulldozer really failed to deliver. The fact that the market has taken so long to move towards using more threads did not really help their case either.

Fact is though, now, with DX12, we are moving more towards more cores finally and their IPC is comparable now as well. It will take time to change the mentality that intel is always superior for gaming, because it has been for so long. People thoughts don't change overnight. Facts however do show that AMD has pretty much caught up and is the superior purchase, if you are currently in need of a CPU. It's nothing so earth shattering as to go out and replace your Haswell, but if you have old hardware or nothing, it is certainly something to at least look at.

[Deleted]

I own a 4790K and I'm perfectly happy with it, but god damn the amount of Intel fanboyism going on right now is ridiculous. You can't call it anything but fanboyism if you can sit here and claim that Intel's options are the only CPUs worth buying still.

Ryzen 5 is bringing pretty small losses in single threaded performance for huge multithreaded gains at fantastic prices. How can anyone possibly argue with the option?

Mate, I own a 5820K, I would pick the 6 core/12 thread Ryzen chip here over that if I was buying now, the price is so much better on the CPU and mobo, thinking about how much money I would of saved is kinda kicking me right now.

I chose the X99 platform over skylake because going to a 4 core system just was not on for the price.

[Vash The Stampede]

https://techreport.com/news/31719/ru...e-to-late-june

cant wait for 6c/8c gaming benchmarks .. for science

I can't wait .. for competition. Right now RyZen is destroying Intel based on price performance. You would have to be insane to get an Intel right now. Though I do believe the 4c/8t RyZen's are not worth the price, personally.

[dadev]

What is the relevance of registers size when pipelining the instructions on a matrix multiplication? Bigger numbers could cause problems, but what else? What kind of advantage bigger registers bring for matrix multiplication?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Do you mean a single matrix times vector multiplication? If so, why even bother vectorizing that? It's all about combining multiple multiplications, then as lloewe wrote you get to transform more vectors at once.

[Deleted]

Ryzen 5 is bringing pretty small losses in single threaded performance for huge multithreaded gains at fantastic prices. How can anyone possibly argue with the option?

For some that small loss in single thread performance might be the deciding factor:
The multi threaded games I play, run well enough on my 3570k and adding more cores won't make a difference as my monitor caps out at 60 fps anyway. However the single threaded games are the ones that I wish performed better, e.g. X-Plane struggles to stay above 30 fps and I really don't want to drop lower than that.

Sure, Ryzen would blow the i5 out of the water when doing multi threaded tasks like running simulation craft, however this is something I might do every two months and it is going to take minutes either way. Other stuff (like compiling) is usually faster than my thought process, so not that much to gain there either.

[Deleted]

For some that small loss in single thread performance might be the deciding factor:
The multi threaded games I play, run well enough on my 3570k and adding more cores won't make a difference as my monitor caps out at 60 fps anyway. However the single threaded games are the ones that I wish performed better, e.g. X-Plane struggles to stay above 30 fps and I really don't want to drop lower than that.

Sure, Ryzen would blow the i5 out of the water when doing multi threaded tasks like running simulation craft, however this is something I might do every two months and it is going to take minutes either way. Other stuff (like compiling) is usually faster than my thought process, so not that much to gain there either.

Unless you had a need for more cores, your position for Ryzen at the moment is not the target demographic, people need to stop to get this idea out of their heads that AMD are trying to get people from their current high end CPUs, the target for this is those with low end CPUs.

Most people don't upgrade due to costs which is why they run with budget CPUs or just budget systems, someone with a dual core E5500 system would see a huge gain here for the money.

[Life-Binder]

Right now RyZen is destroying Intel based on price performance. You would have to be insane to get an Intel right now.

uh-huh

[Arbiter]

For some that small loss in single thread performance might be the deciding factor:
The multi threaded games I play, run well enough on my 3570k and adding more cores won't make a difference as my monitor caps out at 60 fps anyway. However the single threaded games are the ones that I wish performed better, e.g. X-Plane struggles to stay above 30 fps and I really don't want to drop lower than that.

Sure, Ryzen would blow the i5 out of the water when doing multi threaded tasks like running simulation craft, however this is something I might do every two months and it is going to take minutes either way. Other stuff (like compiling) is usually faster than my thought process, so not that much to gain there either.

No one is telling you to go out and replace your 3570K. CPUs haven't made that much of a jump in gaming to even justify a realistic need. However, if you want to be realistic, the 1600X is going to be a single threaded improvement when comparing stock to stock against Ivy Bridge and you upgrading to a 7600K isn't going to much that much of a difference in comparison.

None the less, we're not talking about a specific task. There's always going to be a clear winner in specific tasks. We're talking about in general. If you said "oh the PC's sole purpose is WoW and nothing else" then yea Ryzen is going to be slightly less preferred when talking about that specific task because it's so reliant on single threaded performance and it doesn't run that well to begin with.

The problem, however, is that people here are treating Ryzen like a huge disappointment as if it's objectively worse than Intel when it's simply untrue. I will say it wasn't a good idea to try and compare the 7700K against Ryzen 7 because the 7700K was the clear winner in games and cheaper (roughly equal to lowest Ryzen 7) but the Ryzen 7 was meant to stack up against Broadwell-E rather than consumer chips. Ryzen 7 gave high end Broadwell-E CPUs competition at half the cost. Ryzen 5 being the line up that should compete against Kaby Lake much better, and it does that fantastically for the price. Select few games are going to even notice a difference and even then the difference is pretty damn minor when you consider the cost for what you're getting.