AMD officially launches Ryzen processors

Recommended Posts

adrynalyne    7,559
2 hours ago, Boo Berry said:

It's also worth noting that it looks like Windows doesn't fully support Ryzen yet either, so that may very well likely be holding back performance as well. I've read stories from ex-Microsoft employees that Intel and Nvidia issues and support were always given top priority by Microsoft whereas AMD issues and support were a secondary priority. But this shouldn't come as any surprise.

It shouldn't come as a surprise that they are stories, agreed. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Circaflex    2,687

Shame we have to wait for "optimizations, or support," you'd think AMD would have worked with a few developers to be launch ready, or have some games to showcase even if these aren't 100% marketed towards gamers. The hype seems to be somewhat real, they offer very similar performance to their Intel counterparts for a very consumer friendly price, however I guess there wont be much of a reason to upgrade to test the waters if it wont beat current gen intels in gaming until "optimizations" and "support" come. AMD has always said, "coming soon," in terms of future optimizations and doesn't always produce the results estimated, sometimes by a large margin.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rippleman    2,550

same performance for 1/2 the price and to some its a fail? And for those that say "what's the point in upgrading?" Most people have upgraded to very latest in a long time. Now, people who haven't upgraded in 2/5/10 years can and do it for a damn good deal. Stay with intel if you are a zealot, but if you simply want the best value for your hard earned $, now you can turn to amd.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Circaflex    2,687
25 minutes ago, Rippleman said:

same performance for 1/2 the price and to some its a fail? lol... idiots. And for those that say "what's the point in upgrading?" Most people have upgraded to very latest in a long time. Now, people who haven't upgraded in 2/5/10 years can and do it for a damn good deal. Stay with intel if you are a zealot, but if you simply want the best value for your hard earned $, now you can turn to amd.

How am I a zealot if I choose not to upgrade to gen 1 of this, because benchmarks show it barely beating my current CPU in workstation tasks, but losing in most gaming. "Upgrading" would be a waste, I am better off waiting for gen 2 or see if this magical optimization will be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rippleman    2,550
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, Circaflex said:

How am I a zealot if I choose not to upgrade to gen 1 of this, because benchmarks show it barely beating my current CPU in workstation tasks, but losing in most gaming. "Upgrading" would be a waste, I am better off waiting for gen 2 or see if this magical optimization will be true.

You are not an zealot if you aren't claiming that this new chip from AMD is a fail. Are you? Aside from that, while YOU are better off not upgrading, it doesn't mean what works for you is the same situation for the majority. The world consists of more computer buyers then you. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rand0m.bullet    18
Posted (edited)

it's looking like a good time to start putting some change away to upgrade. I am Coming from a i5 655K 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crisp    3,269
9 hours ago, Melfster said:

Or It could be AMD being lazy. I mean it is very hard now to find mini-itx boards for Ryzen.  I don't think you can blame Microsoft for all performance problems of AMD.

You mean like these X370 chipset m-itx boards coming soon?

 

avm52vdmj6jy.jpg

 

Although I'm not a fan of Biostar, other manufacturers are coming.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dwLostCat    963

Can't wait for the six cores I'm savin up for.

 

Eight would be cool but it's a leetle out of my budget, and usually unnecessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ThaCrip    160

i have not looked into the details on the CPU yet, but generally speaking... i can't see spending more than around $200 on a CPU tops as $300+ is just too much, especially if there is no significant difference vs other CPU's that are around $200 at the moment.

 

p.s. i am currently on a i3-2120 CPU which i had since May 2012 and i likely won't need to upgrade that for the foreseeable future for general system performance. i encode some x264 stuff once in a while and i am sure these CPU's with plenty of cores would offer a big boost to performance in that regard but i don't do it enough to justify shelling out $300+ for a CPU and not only that i would have to get a new motherboard etc which at that point you might as well just build a whole new computer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yogurth    1,230

Been reading few threads on Ryzen and it seems that in gaming Ryzen performs better under Windows 7, up to ~15%. Current speculation is that the SMT scheduling could be Windows 10 problem. there are few exaples like the one below if You have the time to read them. Ironic that Ryzen performs better on unsupported OS.

 

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-8#post-38775732

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Danielx64    496
16 minutes ago, Yogurth said:

Been reading few threads on Ryzen and it seems that in gaming Ryzen performs better under Windows 7, up to ~15%. Current speculation is that the SMT scheduling could be Windows 10 problem. there are few exaples like the one below if You have the time to read them. Ironic that Ryzen performs better on unsupported OS.

 

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-8#post-38775732

Give it a few weeks and patches will be out

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yogurth    1,230
3 minutes ago, Danielx64 said:

Give it a few weeks and patches will be out

Hopefully, but it is rather odd that this is the case currently....I wonder if MS will patch Windows 10 to perform faster or Windows 7 to perform slower :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry    2,264

Here's a relevant video and review.

 

 

I think people should give it some time before rushing to judgement about Ryzen. Windows will need to be updated for Ryzen, along with BIOS/microcode updates to address things like DDR4 speeds. And game engines will have to update for Ryzen compatibility as well. It's just going to take time.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dwLostCat    963
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

I think people should give it some time before rushing to judgement about Ryzen. Windows will need to be updated for Ryzen, along with BIOS/microcode updates to address things like DDR4 speeds. And game engines will have to update for Ryzen compatibility as well. It's just going to take time.

Well, what people want to know before buying a product is how it performs NOW, so that's really not relevant to everyone.

 

I'm sure there will be some reviews revisited and all that, but telling people 'just wait it'll get better' is not really going to work.

 

When it does, then we'll have something to talk about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry    2,264
Posted (edited)

It performs great NOW and it's only going to get better once Windows fully supports it, there's BIOS/microcode updates and game engines updates are pushed. For that price point, versus the $1,000 Intel CPU, it's a no-brainer which one to buy... the Ryzen. Especially when dual-proc boards come out!

 

The video is proof of this. Look at the gaming framerates, the so-called "Achilles heel" of Ryzen - it's perfectly acceptable.

 

I guess anything to get the fanboys of both sides raging with pitchforks.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Draconian Guppy    12,188
Posted (edited)
On 3/3/2017 at 4:02 AM, Mando said:

Boom!

Told ya real world wouldnt match their inflated "claims"

AMD at their best ;) 

 

Source:- https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/03/amd-ryzen-review/

Lol,  how about posting more from that source?

 

 

Quote

In older games like GTA V and Metro Last Light, performance is largely the same across all the CPUs, with only the 7700K pulling ahead in GTA V thanks to its slightly higher clock speed. Levelled out at 3.5GHz, the scores are nearly all identical.

Quote

The story changes dramatically when it comes to more modern games that heavily tax the CPU and benefit from the extra cores, especially under the CPU-heavy DirectX 12 API. In Rise of the Tomb Raider, running on DX11, Ryzen's average FPS matches that of the 7700K, with only the 10-core 6950X taking a significant lead. But the 99th percentile minimum FPS are as much as 20 percent lower compared to the 6900K. In DX12, the differences are less pronounced, but still there. Ryzen is 10 percent slower than a 6900K in average FPS, and a whopping 26 percent slower in minimum FPS.

10% slower and %26 slower versus  $1650 vs $500 is acceptable no?

 

 

 

Then more proof that there needs to be optimization on platforms, sadly, AMD didn't foresee this? Didn't care

 

IMG_6662.jpg

Quote

A bonus BSOD that we encountered a couple of times before we got the Win 10 Anniversary Update installed. Suffice to say that Ryzen and the AM4 platform aren't fully stable yet.

2 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

It performs great NOW, it's only going to get better. For that price point, versus the $1,000 Intel CPU, it's a no-brainer which one to buy... the Ryzen. Especially when dual-proc boards come out!

 

Exactly! 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dwLostCat    963
3 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

It performs great NOW and it's only going to get better once Windows fully supports it, there's BIOS/microcode updates and game engines updates are pushed. For that price point, versus the $1,000 Intel CPU, it's a no-brainer which one to buy... the Ryzen. Especially when dual-proc boards come out!

If I was buying right NOW, the 7700K would make a better and cheaper gaming machine and I don't really do much that requires power outside of that.

 

Certainly, if I was buying for the overall experience and not just gaming they're pretty damn good.

 

(Side note, in case you haven't been paying attention I am an AMD fan and will be getting a six core Ryzen, I just don't find them a fantastic value on the eight core procs.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry    2,264
Posted (edited)

Jay's video is the best example of not taking vendor bias into account and just playing games with Ryzen.

 

I feel sorry for people who care about "moar FPS" when the FPS already provided is more than enough to drive most panels at 1080p.

 

I also feel sorry for people who forget that new technologies always has some issues. Intel has had their share of issues, remember when X99 launched? Remember how that was a mess?

 

This is just in general (especially that Reddit cancer) not anyone in particular.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Draconian Guppy    12,188
1 minute ago, Boo Berry said:

Jay's video is the best example of not taking vendor bias into account and just playing games with Ryzen.

 

I feel sorry for people who care about "moar FPS" when the FPS already provided is more than enough to drive most panels at 1080p.

 

I also feel sorry for people who forget that new technologies always has some issues. Intel has had their share of issues, remember when X99 launched? Remember how that was a mess?

 

This is just in general (especially that Reddit cancer) not anyone in particular.

People are raving about linustips did it:

 

Quote

I prefer how LinusTips did it.. They took CPU's in the same price range and compared THAT CPU's performance.

In which case, AMD Ryzen performed better in every case, with a few exceptions.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry    2,264

If I was buying right now (already got a 7700K :laugh:), I'd buy Ryzen 7 1800X in a heartbeat and accept the "early adoption issues".

 

Actually, I might buy a Ryzen chip anyways. Just because.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dwLostCat    963
3 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

Jay's video is the best example of not taking vendor bias into account and just playing games with Ryzen.

 

I feel sorry for people who care about "moar FPS" when the FPS already provided is more than enough to drive most panels at 1080p.

If you can spend 400-500 on a proc and can't be bothered to get a decent gaming monitor that can do more than 60hz that's just sad.

 

Hell, I don't even HAVE a decent system atm (other than vidcard) and I'm at 1440p@75+Freesync

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry    2,264
Posted (edited)

Well, in the case with Ryzen there's more that meets the eye, that's for sure. Especially considering that Windows hasn't been updated to fully support it (e.g. the scheduler seems like it needs updating). Not sure if we'll see Ryzen compatibility come with a monthly cumulative update or one of the major releases (e.g. Creator's Update). There's also the issue with DDR4 RAM speeds being limited, which surely is limiting performance with gaming. This will be addressed in a BIOS/microcode update within a month or two, so I've read.

 

6 minutes ago, LostCat said:

If you can spend 400-500 on a proc and can't be bothered to get a decent gaming monitor that can do more than 60hz that's just sad.

 

Hell, I don't even HAVE a decent system atm (other than vidcard) and I'm at 1440p@75+Freesync

Well, some people may not be able to afford monitors that can do over 60Hz (but if you can, overclockable Korean monitors are great!). I've got an IPS 1440p @ 144Hz with FreeSync too, but I can't use FreeSync as I use Nvidia and there's no way in hell I'd pay for the G-Sync "tax". We'll see if that changes with Vega. ;) Of course, if I do jump to Vega I'll finally lose use of my Hackintosh partition (and the Clover bootloader).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yogurth    1,230
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, LostCat said:

If you can spend 400-500 on a proc and can't be bothered to get a decent gaming monitor that can do more than 60hz that's just sad.

 

Hell, I don't even HAVE a decent system atm (other than vidcard) and I'm at 1440p@75+Freesync

You have to consider that for many of us gaming is secondary or tertiary activity on our PC's and  waging between 144 mhz monitor or more memory, I'd go for more memory every time. Also i am 30+ frames per second is enough guy as I do not play competitive Shooters or Dotas :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry    2,264
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Draconian Guppy said:

Then more proof that there needs to be optimization on platforms, sadly, AMD didn't foresee this? Didn't care

In regards to the BSOD and issues with Windows, that's up to Microsoft to add compatibility for Ryzen to Windows, AMD themselves can't do this. Apparently Microsoft doesn't work as closely with AMD as they do with Intel and Nvidia. Big surprise, huh?

 

Same with Linux to a certain degree and the Linux kernel itself, though it's pretty decent in 4.10 and continues to get better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.