Ryzen Release Thread

[SteelCrysis]

Ryzen 3 coming in Q3: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ryzen-p...34907.html

[SteelCrysis]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryz...34926.html

Just in time for the Fourth of July, AMD's Ryzen 5 1600 rocketed from the No. 5 spot on Amazon's bestselling CPU list to the second place position over the weekend, unseating Intel's Core i5-7600K. Amazon's best seller list is hardly indicative of overall market share--a multitude of other factors complicate the issue--but it serves as a somewhat decent indicator of the state of the upgrade market.

First, the caveats. Amazon updates its list of bestselling CPUs hourly, so the results change frequently. We keep an eye on the list and also monitor price changes, and based on our casual observations over the last month (we haven't charted the progress, and we don't have access to historical data) the Ryzen 5 1600 has frequently occupied the 6th place position. That changed recently as the Ryzen 5 1600 moved up to displace the Intel Core i5-7600K, the long-running second-place processor. Intel's Core i7-7700K still enjoys the leading spot.

That move up is an encouraging sign for the Ryzen lineup. Intel has stood resolute in its current pricing scheme for Kaby Lake processors, but more competition might change the company's calculus.
...
Passmark posts quarterly updates that outline the number of benchmark submissions the company has received, and AMD submissions have jumped impressively. Due to an incredibly misleading chart and article title, many mistake the results as an indicator of Ryzen's market share. The results do not represent actual sales figures, and certainly do not represent market share.

Passmark's original chart showed that submissions with AMD systems rose from 20.6% the previous quarter to 31%. That's a jump of 10.4%.

However, an unexplained update to the chart lowers the percentage to 26.6%, which is a 6% increase. In either case, that is the largest single-quarter increase Passmark has recorded from either vendor since it began tracking in Q1 2004. The incredible rise in submissions may not be indicative of actual market share, but it does indicate that something is happening, and any jump is a positive development.

We've included a quick breakdown of the numbers behind Passmark's chart at the end of the article.

We headed over to Steam's hardware survey to see how AMD is doing on the gaming front, at least on the dominant online gaming platform.

Admittedly, we didn't expect to see a reduction. According to Steam's hardware survey, AMD systems have declined by 0.85% over the last several months. We dove into Steam's more detailed data, which breaks down the users by frequency range (windows), to attempt to ascertain if the changes just represent old AMD systems that gamers are retiring. Oddly, the reductions seem to be pretty steady across the board. It's certainly conflicting information compared to other indicators, but we have to remember this survey isn't an active tracker.


There's no doubt that AMD's new lineup is changing the status quo for desktop processors, particularly in the pricing department. It isn't surprising to see the Ryzen 5 1600 enjoying success; it has a great price point and solid performance trends that merited its recent inclusion in our Best Gaming CPUs recommendations. AMD's processors might not lead in gaming performance, but the price to performance ratio is impossible to ignore.

The company has already gained significant traction in the mid-range, but it's only the beginning. AMD has even more models, including the highly anticipated ThreadRipper, coming to market later this month. That could change the paradigm on the high-end desktop market while the Ryzen 3 squeezes the low end. Mobile processors also make up roughly two-thirds of the processor pie, and AMD hasn't released its mobile variants yet.

It appears that Intel has responded, at least partially, by lowering prices for its mid-range Skylake-X models (compared to the previous generation). Unfortunately, the company hasn't changed pricing on its existing mid-range processors. Perhaps we'll see a reaction when Intel releases Cannonlake later this year.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/234974/amd-t...oft-sandra

Interestingly, the single core performance dropped a bit on GeekBench, from 4216 to 4074. It made up for it in multi-threading however, where the chip posted a result of 26768, up from 24723. Sadly, these numbers still pale in comparison to the 10-core i9-7900X, in both single threaded and multi-threaded figures. As the 1950X ships with significantly lower clocks compared to the i9-7900X's clocks (with boost considered, anyway), I suppose it truly will come down to whether these CPUs can close the gap via overclocking, or optimizations towards launch and beyond. Either way, it seems there may be a bit of a hill to climb to get there. Whether or not it is surmountable remains to be seen.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/235092/intel...slide-deck
W1zzard is convinced that Intel is trash-talking AMD. I'll let the readers judge for themselves.

[SteelCrysis]

Ryzen 3 coming July 27: http://techreport.com/news/32239/ryzen-3...es-july-27

[SteelCrysis]

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-rma-fraud-on-amazon/

What seems like a very well organized mass-RMA fraud is seeping through the cracks over at Amazon. In a very short period of time, two users have so far reported receiving a fake Ryzen processor and both have indicators of being orchestrated by the same person(s). While Amazon did offer both of them refunds and even a gift card, these type of scams might turn away first timers who want to try the PC-building experience and even lead to damaged motherboards in some cases (which Amazon will probably not cover).

[SteelCrysis]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/inte...,5125.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/inte...125-4.html

One presentation stuck out more than the rest. Intel presented a deck that outlined what it considers to be its advantages against AMD’s EPYC CPUs. The slides generated a lot of controversy over the last week, but they haven't been presented in context. We’re going to fix that.
...
AMD's lack of gaming optimization at launch was cited by Intel as an indicator that EPYC would begin its life similarly flat-footed, necessitating a similar optimization period for enterprise-oriented apps. Of course, that's an odd claim, in our opinion, considering Intel's statements to us about the impact of Skylake-X's mesh on some games:
...
Core i9-7900X uses the same core and mesh design as the Intel Scalable Processor family, so it's easy to contend that these same issues might affect Intel's Purley processor in some workloads.

The final slide includes Intel's summation of its talking points, and the company stated, again, its key concept that "not all cores are created equal."

It's easy to see why the slides are generating controversy. Taken in context, Intel's claims do have some technical merit that we'll have to explore in more detail. But other points are more educated guesses than definitive conclusions.

In other areas, Intel may have simply spoken too soon. VM interoperability, for instance, may be a challenge for AMD at first. However, we've since learned that the company is already partnering with the major hypervisor vendors. This may help smooth over any performance issues before EPYC goes on sale. While it's true that AMD doesn't have an ecosystem to match Intel's, EPYC is collecting quite the list of supporters. It's possible that Intel also underestimated EPYC's management features.

Many consider the glued-together desktop die messaging to be ill-conceived from a company that also repurposes enterprise silicon for desktop PCs. It could be argued that AMD designed its Zeppelin die for data centers, an opinion we've voiced several times, and uses the same tactic of sharing it with the desktop models.
...


It's interesting that Intel did not focus on AMD's comparatively higher TDPs during its workshop. That is one of the most important concerns in the data center, as greater efficiency reduces total cost of ownership. Early testing indicates EPYC processors may have competitive power attributes, despite their higher TDP ratings, likely due to fine-grained power optimizations.

Intel is usually nonplussed in the face of competition. But its reaction to EPYC speaks volumes. In the end, absolute performance isn't nearly as important as the price-to-performance ratio, and initial signs indicate that AMD is off to a good start. AMD has scrapped its way through the last several years selling mostly budget parts, so any market gains are a win. Significant data center penetration could be a watershed moment for the company and fuel more investment in future products.

Conversely, Intel already delivers compelling performance, and its mature ecosystem will be hard for AMD to outshine. But the industry is pining for a suitable low-cost alternative, and if AMD's EPYC delivers, Intel's strengths might not be able to hold it off.

[SteelCrysis]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/over...16-13.html
Interesting. According to this, Ryzen CPUs are binned, with Ryzen 5s being cut-down Ryzen 7s, and the best dies going to the Ryzen 7 1800X.

[SteelCrysis]

Ryzen 7 1700 undervolts well, and can be passively cooled:



http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2993-a...ing/page-2

In this way, Intel’s CPU has now become the “project car” product. AMD Ryzen started its life as a project car – the product you buy because you’re OK with being under the hood a few hours a day, just to get the thing running perfectly. Now, with Ryzen’s initial launch issues somewhat smoothed out (but not completely), the CPU is holding well in streaming performance with minimal out-of-box tweaks. To get the 7700K to hold performance, we need quality tweaks, overclocks, and other “under the hood” modifications.

Our testing is by no means fully definitive of all approaches to streaming, but we can draw at least some firm conclusions based on the numbers we’ve collected thus far. Right now, today, Intel’s 7700K is getting crushed by the R7 1700 in our DiRT Rally test stream. The field levels a bit with DOTA2, but requires playing with process priority and forces Intel up against a wall. DOTA2, as a reminder, leans heavily on higher frequencies and isn’t as abusive as most other games on the market.

For game streamers – people who hope to live-stream output while simultaneously using the same host CPU to play/render their content – we absolutely recommend the R7 over the ~$300 class i7 CPUs. We’d recommend the R7 approach for folks who wish to avoid using NVENC for their livestream encoding. For professional streamers who absolutely must hold both tight frame latencies and quality stream output, we’d still recommend a dedicated capture box. The low-end frametimes drop with live encoding on the system, producing variable frametimes (0.1% lows, in our metrics) that can impact the experience for professionals concerned about framerate/frametimes in CSGO or DOTA2, for example. This is likely a non-issue for a lot of the more casual streamers or for people less concerned about high framerate consistency, but may matter for ultra-competitive players in an environment where money exchanges hands for shooting first. In those scenarios, a stream box fixes the latency challenge.

If that’s not a concern – and it may well not be one – then the R7s get our recommendation over the i7-7700K presently, hands-down, based on today’s testing. The R7 1700 didn’t need an overclock to produce its consistent stream output while maintaining relative gaming performance (“relative” because, like the 7700K, we still see reduced frametime consistency). Overclocking would further bolster numbers, of course, but may end up being unnecessary for most folks. We’d still recommend the 1700 over the 1700X or 1800X, purely because a simple OC gets any 1700 within range of both alternatives. The money can be put toward something else, like RAM.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techspot.com/review/1450-cor...page9.html

If you care at all about value, the Ryzen 5 1600 is clearly the way to go. This is why we recently named it the best value performance desktop CPU. It was unlikely that the Core i7-7800X was going to change that, but we hoped the performance would at least be a compelling reason to buy Intel's new six-core processor.
...
Compared to the 7800X, the R5 1600 deliveres a similar experience once overclocked and even at stock it was just 4% slower throughout our benchmarks. It also consumes less power, costs considerably less, and comes with a better cooler out of the box. The Ryzen 5 1600 is the obvious choice for gamers.

[SteelCrysis]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-...49-10.html

AMD is hitting hard with Ryzen 3. The quad-core models aren't as aggressively segmented as Intel's Core i3 family, so you get unlocked ratio multipliers, a competent Wraith Spire cooler, and a lower cost to entry. And it isn’t like overclocking Ryzen 3 1300X requires much effort; we used a B350-based motherboard and the stock thermal solution for a quick and easy jump to 3.9 GHz.

In comparison, Intel's only overclockable Core i3 is pricey on its own, and that's before you factor in an expensive Z270-based motherboard or third-party heat sink/fan.
...
So, if you're only doing office work and don't plan on buying an add-in GPU, Intel's the way to go.

However, enthusiasts looking for a speedy chip should strongly consider the Ryzen 3 1300X. It's an excellent value that leaves room in your budget for other high-performance devices. It also gives you spare cores for productivity applications. AMD has solidified its AM4 motherboard ecosystem, so the platforms are stable, and we can confidently recommend them. We’ll follow up with in-depth application testing, but initial signs are positive. After all, it isn’t hard to imagine that quad-core models will best Intel's dual-cores offerings in most productivity applications.

Make no mistake, you’ll see the Ryzen 3 1300X on our Best CPUs list soon. We'll circle back with application testing in the Ryzen 3 1200 review. Meanwhile, the Coffee Lake processors can’t come soon enough for Intel.

http://techreport.com/review/32301/amd-r...eviewed/13

That's good news for AMD, but Ryzen 3 parts will still sell for as much as Core i3s—a fact that I find a bit hard to stomach.

As I noted at the beginning of this review, those prices seem ambitious for one major reason: onboard graphics and Ryzen's lack thereof. Intel's similarly-priced Core i3 chips offer a plug-and-play PC build for those who don't game. That missing graphics processor won't matter for gamers shopping Ryzen 3, of course, but it matters for the much larger market of basic PCs and home-theater machines out there. The unavoidable need for and cost of a discrete graphics card limits the appeal and design envelope for Ryzen 3 chips. All this will change with the eventual arrival of Ryzen APUs and their Radeon Vega onboard graphics, but for now, Intel would seem to maintain its lock on the basic DIY PC.

Considering Ryzen's missing integrated graphics, AMD might have considered even more aggressive pricing. A Ryzen 3 1300X for $99 or $109 and a Ryzen 3 1200 for $79 or $89 would have really given us something to talk about for performance-per-dollar, and it would also leave plenty of wiggle room for buyers to squeeze that discrete graphics card into their budgets. Those price points wouldn't be unprecedented, either: the company's unlocked and graphics-free Athlons of years past occupied similar brackets. Ryzen 3 chips seem like a perfect successor to those products.

In that light, Intel's Kaby Lake Pentiums and Core i3s (except the pricey i3-7350K) still have plenty of appeal in the face of the Ryzen onslaught. Kaby Lake chips still have a single-threaded performance advantage that will make basic desktop tasks feel snappier, and more well-heeled Core i3 buyers can add an Optane Memory cache to big hard drives for SSD-like performance from their large Steam libraries and other applications. That might be an appealing prospect given the industry-wide NAND supply crunch that's occurring right now.

No, you can't overclock any Core i3 (again, except the pricey i3-7350K), but I feel like that restriction isn't that choking given Kaby Lake chips' already-solid performance, high efficiency, and built-in graphics processors for those who need them. Intel also doesn't seem to lock down memory multipliers on its locked CPUs, so it's easy enough to run fast RAM with one of those chips for extra performance. Solid-looking Z270 boards are available for about the same price as AMD B350 boards, and USB 3.1 Gen 2 support is about the only thing missing from those inexpensive Intel mobos.

All that said, if you'd rather build an all-AMD budget gaming box with Ryzen 3, I wouldn't blame you. Socket AM4 motherboards should offer a fine upgrade path to Ryzen 5 or Ryzen 7 CPUs if more computing power is needed down the line, and USB 3.1 Gen 2 support baked in is a nice bonus versus affordable Intel mobos. AMD's Wraith Stealth cooler is both quiet and pleasant-sounding, too, a nice change of pace from Intel's bottom-dollar stock coolers of late.

Of the two Ryzen 3 CPUs launching today, I'd grab a Ryzen 3 1300X for its high stock clocks and wide XFR range, but that's because my patience for overclocking has waned in my old age. Folks willing to spend some time in firmware with the Ryzen 3 1400 may find enough performance left in the tank to make it worth the money saved, and since every dollar matters for gaming machines at this price point, AMD's unlocked multipliers on the Ryzen 3 1400 could help to move quite a few of those chips in budget gaming builds. Either way, you can't go wrong, and that should be music to AMD's ears as the Ryzen buzz continues to build.

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/25...-i3-family

With Ryzen 3, AMD is targeting (relatively) budget gamers who don’t have a lot of cash to throw around, but who want more performance in multi-threaded applications than Core i3 can provide. True budget buyers who only require a basic system will be best served by the Core i3-7100, which offers an integrated GPU that Ryzen 3 lacks. But Intel’s GPUs, while far better than in the past, still never get the chance to strut their stuff on that platform. Intel reserves its highest performing GPUs for mobile products, which means you can’t really expect great 1080p performance out of a Core i3 without buying a GPU as well. AMD is betting that a true quad-core that frees up $20-40 in spending is more attractive to the budget gamer than the prospect of paying for an iGPU that never gets used at a higher price. Time will tell if they’re right about this.

Beyond that, Ryzen neatly slides into place at the bottom of AMD’s refresh cycle. If you’ve followed the launch of Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7, this won’t be a surprise. AMD’s decision to standardize its CPU configurations make performance fairly easy to predict. And in this case, Ryzen 3’s overall performance establishes it as competitive relative to the Core i3, though exactly how competitive will depend on what tests you care about and whether you want an iGPU. If you’ve got the cash to spend, we’d argue that the 1600X is the best multi-threaded performer in AMD’s lineup, with the best balance between price, single-threaded, and multi-threaded performance. But buyers who choose to save some money and opt for Ryzen 3 can count on a capable, solid CPU.

[SteelCrysis]

Ryzen Linux bug: http://techreport.com/news/32362/amd-con...m-on-ryzen
Check out this comment:

This issue has been floating around since RyZen's launch and there's a thread about the latest developments in TR's forums too.

While this issue has been around for about 5 months now, the real key to getting it recognized was that some Gentoo guys put together a GCC test script that automated the process so you can start throwing segfaults pretty quickly. That automation and the additional publicity finally got the attention of AMD.

Edit: And this comment too:

The Gentoo people noticed it because they are a source only distro. Basically, you compile *everything* that runs on your system from source code. So, their users run the compiler a lot. They are prime candidates for finding a bug like this.

The down side is that people who like to build all of their programs from scratch are considered a little nutty, so they aren't always taken seriously when they report problems. Lots of time it's problems with their hardware (bad PSU, CPU pins bent, bad memory, wrong BIOS settings, etc.) and not a true fault in the processor. You have to go through a lot of steps to rule out pilot error before you can solidly point the finger at the processor having a bug.

The Skylake bug that the Prime95 community found was a lot quicker to escallate because it has a well populated forum of very knowledgable people who have been beating on CPUs for decades and know how to quickly diagnose hardware issues. Heck, Prime95 is commonly used as a burn in tool. Want to see if your PSU is good? Cooling system? Memory config? Run Prime95 for a day.

So, it comes down to experience of the community and credibility.

[SteelCrysis]

AMD issues revised Ryzen CPUs to fix Linux compiling bug: http://techreport.com/news/32459/amd-shi...le-bug-fix

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/236659/lates...p-to-1-55v

A warning to users of Gigabyte's X370 K7 motherboard: the most recent F5 BIOS version, which was posted as a stable release on the company's BIOS support page, has been originating reports from users as having increased the dynamic voltage applied towards stratospheric values (from a "healthy CPU vCore baseline.) The problem appears to be related to the usage of Gigabyte's Dynamic vCore functionality, where users that were seeing vCore values of around 1.2v started seeing those dynamic values, as set by the motherboard, being set to a crispy 1.55v instead, at the same clocks as before the BIOS update. If you have such a motherboard, and have recently updated your BIOS to revision F5 or planned on doing so, please do yourself a favor and set vCore manually to your value of choice, compensating with LLC (Load Line Calibration) so that your CPU isn't shocked to death with additional vCore.

[SteelCrysis]

http://wccftech.com/amd-talks-ryzen-zen-...ock-speed/

Don Woligroski, Desktop CPU Marketing Manager at AMD

I’ve said this before and I think it holds true. Zen, Ryzen, was the worst case scenario. It was a brand new architecture on a brand new node. So the worst case scenario we could’ve possibly had, and it’s pretty good. You can get to over 4.GHz.

We’re definitely working on improving, our engineers [are] really smart guys and things are looking better as we go along. I can’t talk to specifics on IPC but that’s an area of focus. We’ve got clock speed headroom to take advantage of and we’ve got tweaks to make sure performance for each clock is better. I’m really looking forward to it…

…I’m personally very encouraged by what’s happening in the next little while. We threw down in 2017. We’ve seen our competitor starting to wake up and respond and we’re not just going to roll over. We have more stuff to come, we’ve got really good stuff coming. We’re not a one hit wonder, we’re keeping the pressure on for sometime. It’ll be a great 2018,. It was a great 2017 and we’ll see how things turn out.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/25...ad-ryzen-2

Add the huge contraction in PC sales the last six years and AMD’s survival has been far from assured, at multiple points. Ryzen, therefore, wasn’t a worst-case scenario for AMD simply because of its node or architecture. The entire process (pun intended) of bringing Ryzen to market was a worst-case scenario for AMD, nearly without exception. It’s genuinely surprising that Ryzen is as strong as it is, given the headwinds AMD faced in bringing the chip to market.

Our cloudy crystal ball suggests 2018 will see the usual set of frequency tweaks and SKU adjustments that are typical of a product on a maturing 14nm process, and we’d expect to see a modest frequency boost within the same TDP and more efficient CPUs hitting lower TDPs further down the stack. AMD has previously implied it would do a 14nm+ spin on Ryzen, even though that terminology is typically used by Intel.

It’s possible that AMD will pull in some architectural changes as well, though we think most of those will likely be reserved for Zen 2, which will arrive on 7nm. GlobalFoundries has said it wants to have 7nm in volume production by the end of 2018, which points to a 2019 launch window for Zen 2. (AMD’s graph above shows a “Zen 3” in 2020, but this doesn’t square with a Zen 2 that debuts in 2019, and GF has publicly said it won’t start High Volume Manufacturing on 7nm until 2H 2018 at the earliest.)

Intel is expected to counter Zen with improved core counts and single-thread performance as part of its upcoming Coffee Lake family of CPUs. But AMD has enough leeway in its current market position to retrench itself without gutting its prices the way it did during the long, sad slide of the Piledriver years. It’s going to be an interesting 12-18 months, even if Zen 2 hits towards the end of that timeframe.

[SteelCrysis]

Ryzen APU benchmarks: https://www.techpowerup.com/237033/amd-r...es-surface

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/237586/amd-r...king-cores

And lucky these users are, as reports so far indicate that most, if not all of the unlocked CPUs come from the same batch of silicon, manufactured between September 4th and September 10th in Malaysia. This may indicate a quality control issue at this specific AMD factory. Alternatively, AMD could be bolstering its stock of Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X CPUs to meet the higher demand of the mid-range chip, by labeling 1800 and 1800X CPUs as 1600 and 1600X respectively. Whatever the reason, it is definitely a welcome surprise to fortunate AMD users. If you have already purchased a Ryzen 5 1600 or 1600X recently, simply checking CPU-Z or looking at your windows task manager will reveal whether you are one of the recipients of an unlocked chip. If you are looking to buy such a CPU however, perhaps second-hand, a Reddit user known as "Rigred" claims he has deciphered the serial numbers corresponding to this batch of processors, allowing prospective buyers to verify that the chip is actually one of the unlocked few.

[SteelCrysis]

Next generation of Ryzen confirmed to be using Socket AM4: https://www.techpowerup.com/239343/amd-s...upport-am4

[SteelCrysis]

Next generation of Ryzen confirmed to be coming Q1 2018: https://www.techpowerup.com/239659/amd-c...in-q1-2018

[SteelCrysis]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryz...36152.html
An interesting read. Ryzen's success is good, but didn't match up to sensationalist headlines.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/240259/amd-r...h-in-march

There is more clarity on when AMD plans to launch its 2nd generation Ryzen "Pinnacle Ridge" processors, along with companion 400-series chipsets. Retailers in Japan, citing upstream suppliers, expect AMD to launch Ryzen # 2000-series (or "Ryzen 2") processors in March 2018, along with two motherboard chipset models, the top-tier AMD X470, and the mid-range AMD B450. An older report pegged this launch at February. The two chipsets are differentiated from their current-generation 300-series counterparts in featuring PCI-Express gen 3.0 general purpose lanes. The "Pinnacle Ridge" processors, on the other hand, are expected to be optical-shrinks of current Ryzen "Summit Ridge" silicon to the new 12 nm silicon fabrication process, which will allow AMD to increase clock speeds with minimal impact on power-draw.

[SteelCrysis]

AMD cuts prices on Ryzen and Threadripper: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-low...36268.html

[SteelCrysis]

Next Ryzen CPUs will use a soldered IHS: https://www.techpowerup.com/241593/amd-r...ldered-ihs

[SteelCrysis]

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-8...-cpu-leak/

In terms of clock speeds, the Ryzen 7 2700X operates at a 300 MHz faster base clock compared to its predecessor at 3.7 GHz and knowing from the Ryzen 5 2600 leak which had a 200 MHz of clock speeds difference between its predecessor in both base and boost clocks, the boost clock for the Ryzen 7 2700X may also operate 300 MHz faster at 4.1 GHz. But there’s also the XFR 2.0 support which should also allow a degree of boost over the boost frequency itself. It looks like the CPU will hit up to 4.2 GHz with XFR 2.0, a decent increase over the 3.9 GHz of the Ryzen 7 1700X.

Aside from the clocks and basic specifications, the Pinnacle Ridge 2nd Generation Ryzen based processors will come with a slightly enhanced Zen+ architecture which will feature the new 12nm+ process node and technologies such as Precision Boost 2.0, XFR 2.0, higher memory and cache latency speeds.

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/242119/first...-processor

Comparing the Ryzen 7 1700X and 2700X side by side in AIDA64's memory benchmark, the latter was 11% faster in the memory latency test and 30% and 16% faster in the L2 and L3 Cache tests, respectively. The Ryzen 7 2700X's single thread performance was surprisingly strong as well. It surpassed the likes of the Intel Core i9-7980XE, i7-8700K, and Threadripper 1950X processors in the Dhrystone Aggregated-int Native benchmark. The Ryzen 7 2700X started to fall behind in multi-core performance, but it still managed to beat the Intel Core i7-8700K. We saw a similar scenario with the Physics test in 3DMark's FireStrike Ultra benchmark. The Ryzen 7 2700X once again annihilated the Intel Core i7-8700K.

[SickBeast]

I no longer trust TPU. I would not be surprised in the least if this was AMD propaganda. It's also not clear whether or not they are testing an overclocked AMD processor against the stock 8700k. Plus the 8700k clocks higher once you overclock it.

[SteelCrysis]

I no longer trust TPU.  I would not be surprised in the least if this was AMD propaganda.  It's also not clear whether or not they are testing an overclocked AMD processor against the stock 8700k.  Plus the 8700k clocks higher once you overclock it.

It's not TPU, they're reporting what a Korean website found. Sorry that this wasn't clear enough.

[SteelCrysis]

Next-generation Ryzen roadmap reportedly leaked: https://www.techpowerup.com/242158/amd-r...map-leaked

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.techpowerup.com/242367/amd-r...-geekbench

The Ryzen 7 2700X CPU that has been tested achieved scores of 4746 single core and 24772 multi-core, which show some interesting improvements over the original flagship Ryzen 7 1800X. The official Geekbench baseline scores for AMD's 1800X are 4249 and 21978, respectively, for single and multicore benchmarks. This means that the new 2700X, which is expected to carry an increased 100 MHz base (3.7 GHz vs 3.6 GHz) and 350 MHz higher boost (4.35 GHz vs 4.0 GHz) over the 1800X, is pulling some additional performance from some micro-architecture refinements, and not just from the added clockspeed. The mobo used, an ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero motherboard, is a X370-series chipset motherboard, so while it supports the new AMD CPUs, it might not fully support all their SenseMI Gen 2 improvements. From what can be gleaned, the Ryzen 7 2700X ran at its default base frequency of 3.7GHz, and the accompanying 16GB memory ran at 2.4GHz.

[SteelCrysis]

Ryzen 5 2600X accidentally shows up on Amazon: https://www.techpowerup.com/242412/amd-r...-on-amazon

[SteelCrysis]

More synthetic benchmarks: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-rev...36683.html

[SteelCrysis]

AMD reduces the prices of current Ryzen and Threadrippper CPUs: https://www.techpowerup.com/242517/amd-t...processors

[SteelCrysis]

Ryzen 7 2800X coming, will not be part of first wave of releases: https://www.techpowerup.com/242688/amd-r...first-wave

[SteelCrysis]

First review of Ryzen 7 2700X is out: https://www.techpowerup.com/242710/canar...iew-is-out

[SteelCrysis]

Russians claim they've got the 2600X, 2700, and 2700X: https://www.techpowerup.com/243150/amd-2...-in-russia

[SteelCrysis]

Zen 5 confirmed to be in development: https://www.techpowerup.com/243182/amd-w...re-already

[SteelCrysis]

Ryzen 2 prices announced, pre-orders now available: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-pin...36878.html

[SteelCrysis]

Z490 chipset on the way: https://www.techpowerup.com/243419/amd-r...pcie-lanes

[SteelCrysis]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd...71-14.html

In gaming, AMD's stock Ryzen 7 2700X delivers a great performance boost that rivals its overclocked predecessor in every one of our tests. Tuning the 2700X provides additional performance, though you probably won't notice the difference. Check out our chart: as you can see, the Ryzen 7 2700X effectively ties Core i7-8700K based on the geometric mean. But it sells at a $30 discount, drops into a less expensive motherboard, and comes with a thermal solution that adds even more value.
...
If you're searching for a more productivity-oriented processor, Ryzen 7 2700X is incredibly attractive. It offers superior performance compared to the Core i7-8700K in many of our threaded tests, and is much more competitive in lightly threaded applications than previous-gen models.
...
In a broader sense, AMD is delivering on its first update to the Ryzen processor series, proving that it can execute on its roadmap. It looks like it's going to be another busy year in the CPU space--and that's more good news for enthusiasts and gamers.

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/26...offee-lake

These new CPUs will almost inevitably be called Ryzen 2, but that’s not the nomenclature AMD uses. Ryzen 2 is reserved for an architectural refresh expected next year on GlobalFoundries’ 7nm process node. The CPU we’re reviewing today still uses the same fundamental architecture as the Ryzen CPUs we reviewed last year — with a few improvements. First, there’s a small amount of additional IPC gain, thanks to the cache and memory latency improvements detailed below. All slides can be enlarged by clicking on them.
...
The Ryzen 7 2700X is not the show-stopper the Ryzen 7 1800X was. But it’s something every bit as important: A measured, genuine improvement executed on-time. As important as first-generation Ryzen was to AMD, the company needed to do more than just launch an architectural revision. It needed to show it could keep executing its roadmap and deliver a steady cadence of improvement over time.

Fans of Intel’s Core i7-8700K will still have a lot to like after this review, unlike poor Core i7-7700K owners, who cheerfully picked up Intel’s latest 7th Generation CPU in January 2017 only to be run over by Ryzen a few months later. High clocks, six cores, and strong IPC make the 8700K a formidable foe and it still punches above its weight class. But the additional 10 percent performance the Ryzen 7 2700X delivers gives AMD’s latest core room to maneuver. Everywhere the 1800X was outperformed, the 2700X is outperformed by less. Everywhere the 1800X won, the 2700X wins by more.

If you know you need single-threaded performance above everything else, the Core i7-8700K is still the top CPU on the market. But in well-threaded code, especially rendering applications, the Ryzen 7 2700X is superior. The fact that it’s $20 cheaper and ships with a decent stock cooler hurts nothing, either. Intel may already be planning its next counter-stroke, but until those rumors become reality, AMD has our nod for top overall CPU.

https://techreport.com/review/33531/amd-...reviewed/8

Aspiring AMD builders without the budget or workload for eight cores and 16 threads of second-generation Ryzen goodness need not despair. The $229 Ryzen 5 2600X delivers single-threaded performance that's only a hair's breadth away from the Ryzen 7 2700X, and its impressive multithreaded performance, high-quality stock cooler, and unlocked multipliers make similarly-priced and locked-down Coffee Lake Core i5s look like a hard sell for do-it-all systems. I'm especially interested to see how the Ryzen 5 2600 stacks up against the Core i5-8400 when we get our hands on that part.

All told, the best thing about today's CPU market is that builders can choose just the chip they need at the right price. Those after the very best single-threaded performance, overclocking potential, high-refresh-rate gaming experiences, and all-round digital audio workstation performance can still get it in the Core i7-8700K, and those things still justify the price premium the blue team's best mainstream chip commands. Even with the tarnish of Meltdown and Spectre on its heat spreader, the i7-8700K is still a remarkable chip—just not as much so as it was back in October of last year.

Those whose needs run more toward sheer multi-threaded grunt, on the other hand, can pick up a Ryzen 7 2700X for less money than the i7-8700K, and they'll enjoy its capable (and colorful) stock heatsink, winning parallel throughput, perfectly snappy per-core performance, and polished platform. AMD has stuffed an impressive amount of bang into the Ryzen 7 2700X for the buck, and if the stuff it does well meshes with your workload, you really can't go wrong. The second round of Ryzen looks mighty fine indeed, and I'm happy to call both the Ryzen 7 2700X and Ryzen 5 2600X TR Editor's Choice's.

Also check out TPU's reviews:
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/...0X/19.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/...0X/21.html