Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ryzen Release Thread
#1
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-...51-12.html
At best another Piledriver.
Quote:AMD's Ryzen 7 launch represents more than just a new CPU family. For most of our readers, it signals the return of competition to the enthusiast-oriented processor market. And considering the flagship 1800X’s potent cost advantage compared to Intel's Core i7-6900K, the competitor AMD singled out months ago, Ryzen 7 does deliver. It's just not as universally superior as the company wanted everyone to believe.

We come away from today's coverage with a number of questions that couldn't be answered in time for the launch. For instance, we discovered Ryzen's tendency to perform better in games with SMT disabled. Could this be a scheduling issue that might be fixed later? AMD did respond to our concerns, reminding us that Ryzen's implementation is unique, meaning most game engines don't use if efficiently yet. Importantly, the company told us that it doesn’t believe the SMT hiccup occurs at the operating system level, so a software fix could fix performance issues in many titles. At least one game developer (Oxide) stepped forward to back those claims. However, you run the risk that other devs don't spend time updating existing titles.

The evening before launch, AMD sent us a list of games that it says should perform well with Ryzen, including Sniper Elite 4, Battlefield 1, Star Wars: Battlefront, and Overwatch, among others. Many of the titles tend to be heavily threaded, which would lend itself well to Ryzen's high core count. We plan on revisiting some of those. Further, AMD suggests adjusting several different parameters for games that suffer from low performance. It recommends using Windows' High Performance power profile (which also helps Intel CPUs). It also says to disable the HPET (High Precision Event Timer), either in your BIOS or operating system, to gain a 5-8% advantage. Our results already reflect HPET disabled, though. Interestingly, AMD's Ryzen Master software requires HPET to “provide accurate measurements,” so you may find yourself toggling back and forth for the best experience.

It’s hard to recommend the Ryzen 7 1800X over Intel's lower-cost quad-core chips for gaming, especially given the Core i7-7700K's impressive performance. That's not a knock against AMD, specifically. After all, we say the same thing about Intel's own Broadwell-E CPUs. High-end Kaby Lake processors constantly challenge pricier competitors, and the flagship -7700K sells for $350. Even after down-clocking the -7700K to 3.8 GHz, it still beats Ryzen 7 1800X in nearly every game in our suite. Those issues would only be exacerbated on a Ryzen 7 1700X, which operates at lower clock rates.

Conversely, the Ryzen 7 1800X is in its element when you throw professional and scientific workloads at it. It isn't the fastest in every high-end benchmark, but any calculation that factors in value almost assuredly goes AMD's way. For years, Intel has operated with impunity, charging inflated prices for incremental speed-ups. The 1800X’s $500 price tag and competitive performance will no doubt excite power users on a budget. To that end, when we weigh the 1800X’s strong showing in workstation and HPC workloads against its issues with games, we can't help but believe that AMD designed this specific configuration with a datacenter-driven mindset and didn’t optimize it thoroughly for desktops. Much like Intel and Broadwell-E, in fact.

AMD’s Precision Boost technology yields a nice dual-core boost during lightly threaded workloads, but it isn’t as advanced as Intel’s sophisticated multi-core Turbo Boost functionality. XFR is a nice feature that automatically offers improved performance with robust cooling solutions, but most of us only get 100 MHz out of it, so it's hard to call it a compelling advantage. Achieving a 4 GHz overclock was straightforward enough through multiplier and voltage adjustments, and there are plenty of AMD-specific firmware settings we need to explore. More headroom could certainly be available (though the Core i7-7700K is honestly more exciting to overclock if all you care about is higher numbers). On the memory overclocking side, AMD hasn’t opened all of the sub-timings yet, and the Core i7-6900K has a throughput advantage with its quad-channel controller.
Ryzen 7 1800X's aggressive price might help put enough pressure on Intel to compel price cuts on Broadwell-E, but the bigger battle is going to happen when Ryzen 5 and 3 emerge to challenge the competition's more affordable (and difficult to usurp) models. AMD is also bringing its Naples server CPUs forward soon, and with what we’ve seen from the Zen core, that should be an exciting launch.

It's a bummer the Ryzen launch was so clearly rushed. We expected AMD to have a better explanation for its gaming performance, but all of the feedback we received from the company came very last-minute. It's hard to imagine these shortcomings weren't discovered previously and diagnosed more thoroughly. We're happy to put in the time and effort, though. Expect more information as it becomes available.

In the meantime, we would recommend Ryzen 7 1800X for heavily-threaded workloads like rendering and content creation. And while we won't judge a processor on its gaming performance alone, current indications suggest AMD's $500 flagship doesn't beat Core i7-7700K for value in that specific segment.
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#2
Did you truly expect anything else (other than a metric shit ton of hype and hot air) out of AMD?!
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply
#3
The fail continues, Linus couldn't get his 1800X to run RAM at faster than DDR4-2666, despite attempting faster speeds with multiple kits, including the kit AMD supplied:


Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#4
Hats off to AMD, they did what I thought was impossible, they made Bulldozer look good.
Reply
#5
Lol. Fx was inefficient, hot and couldn't beat the 2600k in hardly anything.
Reply
#6
https://www.techpowerup.com/231183/amd-t...reddit-ama
Quote:AMD, at its post-Ryzen 7 launch Reddit AMA, disclosed some juicy details about its other upcoming socket AM4 chips, beginning with the rest of the Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 "Summit Ridge" processor roll-out, and a little bit about its 8th generation socket AM4 APU, codenamed "Raven Ridge." To begin with, AMD CEO Lisa Su stated that "Raven Ridge" will also be sold under the Ryzen brand. This would mark a departure from the less-than-stellar A-series branding for its performance APUs. "Raven Ridge" likely combines a "Zen" quad-core CPU complex (CCX) with an integrated GPU based on one of AMD's newer GPU architectures (either "Polaris" or "Vega").
...
Looking deeper down into the future, AMD will roll out CPU architectures that incrementally update the "Zen" architecture, much in the same way "Piledriver," "Steamroller," and "Excavator" updated "Bulldozer." For now, Lisa Su is referring to two such future architectures as "Zen2" and "Zen3." These could imply that "Zen2" and "Zen3" will still be heavily based on "Zen," but come with new features and minor performance improvements, don't expect the >50% IPC leap seen between Bulldozer and Zen, but a more reasonable 5-15% gain seen between Bulldozer thru Excavator.
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#7
(03-03-2017, 04:41 AM)BenSkywalker Wrote: Hats off to AMD, they did what I thought was impossible, they made Bulldozer look good.

How did they do that?

Zen is too little too late IMO and dependent on a performance niche market that doesn't like gaming for its success, but it is a lot better than BullShit ever was. Zen is what BullShit should have been all along (obviously they wouldn't be targetting better than Broadwell performance back then, but you get the picture).
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply
#8
Quote:How did they do that?

Bulldozer was $245 at launch, and very much unlike Ryzen, it sometimes won(at least beat Intel) benches the enthusiasts care about-

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-b...0-tested/8

Another take-

Quote:No, it’s not a dud—unless you’re looking to replace a 5-year-old, quad-core Intel Core i5 chip for mainstream gaming at the most popular display resolution. There, the Ryzen 7 1700 can stumble, and stumble hard.


http://www.pcworld.com/article/3176100/c...tml?page=2

Bulldozer was never *THAT* bad. Getting embarrassed by a five year old mid tier CPU? Ryzen is a new low for AMD IMO.
Reply
#9
Bulldozer couldn't even beat a 920 in gaming.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/434?vs=47

And, even in your leak, it loses to/matches the Phenom cpus in gaming. Couple that with its laughable inefficiency, I'd say it's worse. Imho.
Reply
#10
(03-03-2017, 07:05 AM)BenSkywalker Wrote:
Quote:How did they do that?

Bulldozer was $245 at launch, and very much unlike Ryzen, it sometimes won(at least beat Intel) benches the enthusiasts care about-

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-b...0-tested/8

Another take-

Quote:No, it’s not a dud—unless you’re looking to replace a 5-year-old, quad-core Intel Core i5 chip for mainstream gaming at the most popular display resolution. There, the Ryzen 7 1700 can stumble, and stumble hard.


http://www.pcworld.com/article/3176100/c...tml?page=2

Bulldozer was never *THAT* bad. Getting embarrassed by a five year old mid tier CPU? Ryzen is a new low for AMD IMO.

I don't think it's that bad, it's WAY better than what it replaces. (and certainly better than the BeefDozer)

It appears that at higher resolutions it gets into the intel performance range, and it's still above 8370s by a good deal at 1080p.

If you combine that with industry leading performance at several office apps and chipset that will undoubtedly have their growing pains I'd say AMD has come full circle to the days I used to buy their parts on principle alone.

I could see buying one of these if I was in the market, been a long time since I've done any 1080p gaming.

An uneven effort, but as I've said before:

If you're doing something second best on the planet, you're still better than almost everybody else.
Reply
#11
Quote:If you're doing something second best on the planet, you're still better than almost everybody else.
No guarantee that consumers will be interested though, especially not when intel is so strong and not expensive (unless you want more than 4 physical cores for some non general-consumer reason).
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply
#12
Hmm

Mixed bag? I think that is what I am hearing.

I cant wait to look at this deeper when I get time.

As for gaming and ram speed limitations, my extremely limited (as in I havent looked into this at all) would have me leaning towards latency. The pipeline in a cpu is vastly complex, feeding all those cores without stalls and wasting cycles..Its a massive task.

To perform so well in scientific cases but tank in gaming, its the differences of the load. Games are unpredictable and latency in the pipeline had a compounded issue. Most other cases are far more forgiving.

Intel went thru something similar when they first introduced hyperthreading. The inherent latency showed many cases where games performed better with HT off. Over the years, intel has made great improvements. This site looks similar for zen.


There is a chance though that amd will be able to smooth over this. Dx12 and the new drive towards load balancing and auto distribution to multiple cores...This is completely a different world from the early days of intel and HT. It seems reasonable that there could be a lot to gain for amd on the game developers and software front. But, if this is inherent latency in the pipeline..its a hurdle that will have to ve dealt with consistently with every title. And those any work that might be done to help with ryzen, it just as well could benefit intel chips. Which arent suffering such hits at all.

I am still excited to take a deep look at zen. There is still hope that this chip picks up in the gaming performance. The single thread performance is really good with zen. Its impressive. But the gaming drop cant be blamed on single thread performance this time. My guess, which is a good one, inherent latency.

Gaming has become a huge factor in x86 PC. Its where many enthusiasts focus. Its a shame that gaming is lacking so bad, cause otherwise Zen is an epic step for AMD
Reply
#13
(03-03-2017, 09:23 AM)gstanford Wrote:
Quote:If you're doing something second best on the planet, you're still better than almost everybody else.
No guarantee that consumers will be interested though, especially not when intel is so strong and not expensive (unless you want more than 4 physical cores for some non general-consumer reason).

The processors are pretty decent, but the gaming benches are going to hurt it. Shame too, cause the multitasking and efficiency is far superior to that small nuclear reactor (When pushed hard, a la fx 9590) bulldozer.
Reply
#14
Quote:To perform so well in scientific cases but tank in gaming, its the differences of the load. Games are unpredictable and latency in the pipeline had a compounded issue. Most other cases are far more forgiving.
Not really this case. With Ryzen AMD skimped on integer performance and on AVX performance. Both things are important for games. Integer for almost any games, AVX for a lot of modern games.
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply
#15
https://www.dailydot.com/parsec/37-perce...-pc-games/


AMD needs to focus on the 79% of PC buyers their chips are a better buy for, not the 21% who care about PC gaming benchmarks.

You don't see Toyota trying to sell Yarises in Road and Track, same principle applies.

With only 37% of people gaming at all, and a little more than half of them "real" gamers, AMD still has a lot of potential to succeed with Ryzen.

(and that doesn't even consider the gamers who would settle for less gaming to have more productivity)
Reply
#16
Quote:You don't see Toyota trying to sell Yarises in Road and Track, same principle applies.

http://www.topgear.com/car-news/geneva-m...-hot-hatch

http://www.topgear.com/car-news/motorspo...oyota-ever

You'd be shocked where Yarises turn up and how they perform.  They are a very capable "little" vehicle.



Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply
#17
AMD responds to Ryzen's bad 1080p gaming performance by blaming game devs: https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/AM...ests-Ryzen
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#18
(03-03-2017, 11:21 PM)24601 Wrote:
(03-03-2017, 09:28 PM)SteelCrysis Wrote: AMD responds to Ryzen's bad 1080p gaming performance by blaming game devs: https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/AM...ests-Ryzen

AMD Cult Leader Messiah Stebe Jobes announces today that all game developers are "holding it wrong," plans no fixes due to the problem totally not being fault of AMD's perfect vision of the future.

lol.






And the assertion that games are "optimized" for intel anything is completely laughable.

The only thing games are optimized for if they are optimized at all is for the AMD tablet cores in the consoles.

Only one to blame is themselves on every count, and it's hilarious to see them spinning at 15k rpm simultaneously everywhere on the internet and banning anyone who says the truth.

I'd say more "sad" than hilarious.

AMD should hire me to be influential in their PR department.

I'd clean up that laughable Team Red and get better members, or just do it myself.

I'd focus resources on what Ryzen does well and deflect every criticism of things like 1080p gaming with comments like, "I'm glad you asked. No part is "all things to all people". We have exceptionally strong cost/benefit ratio in our Ryzen parts for the vast majority of customers who are not gamers at all, or are casual gamers. Furthermore, our exceptional multithreaded performance makes Ryzen chips the value proposition for the hardcore gamer who also works on his or her pc, and games at resolutions higher than 1080p. I'd note if a person is a serious gamer using a 1080p monitor or involved in competitive gaming as their livelihood, they would be better served by our competitor's similarly fine products."

THAT is how AMD should be responding to this gaming "issue".

You have to play your game, not the other team's game or you are going to lose. It's all a matter of telling the truth, but emphasizing the positives while acknowledging the negatives.

AMD is at a critical "do or die" junction in their history. Personally, I'd love to help them not just survive, but thrive.

Alas, my guess is they still have Rollo dart boards and Voodoo dolls in their offices so things will likely stay the same.
Reply
#19
(03-03-2017, 11:13 AM)googoo24 Wrote: The processors are pretty decent, but the gaming benches are going to hurt it. Shame too, cause the multitasking and efficiency is far superior to that small nuclear reactor (When pushed hard, a la fx 9590) bulldozer.


I have yet to look at other sites. I feel though this is gonna be attacked hard. The drop off seems pretty significant in gaming, but i have yet to look....honestly, dont want to see a bunch of negative crap on it
Reply
#20
If you think about it, a person could definitely make a case for ryzen on gaming forums.

A lot of forum folks work with their PCs as well, and if you're on a forum odds are good you're not rocking some 1080p monitor.

Monitor choice is probably the most important in PC gaming. The only people going 1080p are on TVs, which aren't exactly great gaming monitors for the most part.
Reply
#21
Time index 13:17: "In fact, there's even online evidence of AMD getting their nose extremely out of joint with reviewers who decided to do 1080p testing. AMD believes that these CPUs are directly aimed at 1440p and 4K gamers. Now I'm going to go ahead and call that out as a load of crap, because the more resolution you put into your game, the more you're offloading the load onto the GPUs, and the CPU becomes less of a factor. 1080p gaming is a very relevant test to CPU overhead, because your CPU is tasked with trying to keep up with the massive amount of frames being drawn by your graphics cards. In fact, if you go look at the Steam hardware analytics, you will find that 1080p gaming is still extremely dominant. So that's why we do 1080p gaming, it is talking directly to the majority. But then again, it's also very fair to call me out and say 'Jay, most people with a 1080p panel wouldn't be running dual TITAN X Maxwell cards,' and with that I would say 'you're absolutely right,' but this was a good way to see just how far we can push the FPS before the CPU really starts to become a factor."


Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#22
I get that most people are using 1080p monitors and I get that using higher resolutions shifts the limit to the GPU.

I also get that for someone like me where 3440 X 1440 is the lowest resolution I would be gaming at 1080p results mean nothing.

If a Ryzen performs about the same at gaming at 3440 X 1440 or 4K as Intel, is mainly faster than Intel at productivity apps, and costs less than Intel I wouldn't have much reason not to consider Ryzen.

However; from what I've seen Ryzen is pretty similar to my 4790k at higher resolution gaming and the 4790Kis fast enough for me at apps, so I also don't have much reason to buy a Ryzen. Ryzen needed to be out a couple years ago when I was replacing my 990X to make me a customer.
Reply
#23
(03-05-2017, 04:59 PM)24601 Wrote: Inb4 Titan Volta comes out and makes zendozer a bottleneck at 4k Tongue

Squirm little viral marketers, squirm Tongue

If you're speaking to me on the viral marketer thing, I doubt there is anyone on the internet AMD detests more than me.

About the only thing they would willingly give me is a ransomware virus.

On the Volta thing, maybe? Hard to comment on parts that far out.
Reply
#24
(03-05-2017, 06:13 PM)RolloTheGreat Wrote: If you're speaking to me on the viral marketer thing, I doubt there is anyone on the internet AMD detests more than me.

Well, he does think I'm you. And that you're a psycho. *shrugs*
Reply
#25
(03-06-2017, 08:34 AM)googoo24 Wrote:
(03-05-2017, 06:13 PM)RolloTheGreat Wrote: If you're speaking to me on the viral marketer thing, I doubt there is anyone on the internet AMD detests more than me.

Well, he does think I'm you. And that you're a psycho. *shrugs*

Following that logic you must be the pscho....I mean...I must be the psycho....but you are me....and I am.....


Rolleyes
Reply
#26
http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/282...-its-1800x
Quote:This further reinforces our stance on the 1800X: You are far better off buying an R7 1700 for $330, applying a 5-minute overclock and a half-decent cooler, and netting a chip that outperforms a stock 1800X, or performs equally to an overclocked version. There is no reason to purchase an 1800X if you are OK with the idea of applying an overclock. Now, we’d normally assume that most folks aren’t overclocking – see: “just want the best” people who buy a 7700K – but it’s a few minutes of work and grants performance that minimally equals the R7 1800X.

The one point of hesitation here is on the future binning of these CPUs. We’re not sure if the early 1700 models will OC higher, or if they’re modified 1800X parts that retain the same headroom. Our sample overclocks to 3.9-4.0GHz, depending on workload, and can push memory to 2933 in those overclocked cases. We know some other folks were able to achieve similar overclocks on their review sample R7 1700 CPUs.

We’re still waiting on our purchased 1700 to come in so that we can review the stock cooler, but overall, thermals are significantly reduced over the 1800X. The performance at the price point, when considering a light overclock, is a far better argument in terms of price than the 1800X. Even for production workloads, the overclocked 1700 produces equal performance to the overclocked 1800X.

So again, we strongly advise against the 1800X as a CPU for a gaming machine. If you’re doing zero production, you’re not doing any content creation, then you’re still generally getting a better deal with an i5 or i7 CPU. For folks who are combining content creation (similar to what we do) with gaming, or may be considering streaming, the R7 1700 is actually a viable chip – and far more so than the 1800X.

AMD is its own best competition at the price point, when considering those use cases.

We still have to look at the 1700X, but based on initial results, the R7 1700 looks like the hero of AMD’s initial lineup. It is far easier to argue this CPU, just know that you’re still limited in terms of gaming performance at the cost. Rendering workloads are far boosted over equivalently priced Intel CPUs. We can stand behind the R7 1700 under the right usage conditions – just figure out if you fit into those conditions.

The story may change for Ryzen at some point, but we don’t review based on promises. We review based on what’s available on the market now. We’ll revisit the CPUs as updates roll-out.
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#27
Yep, it's just like I said. The 1700 is the winner of the three processors. IMHO. The 1800x is kinda useless.
Reply
#28
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/8073/a...ndex5.html
Quote:First off, we want to thank XtremeSystems and AMD for giving TweakTown the opportunity to test Ryzen's solid state storage performance. We are pleased with the PCIe storage performance that Ryzen delivers. It is within striking distance of Intel and we believe that for the most part user experience between the two platforms is comparable. However, SATA performance between the two platforms is another matter. Ryzen is at a distinct disadvantage compared with Intel if you are running a SATA SSD.
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#29
(03-08-2017, 03:00 AM)SteelCrysis Wrote: http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/8073/a...ndex5.html


I wish they had used more drives, what a pathetically small sample size. Its quite shocking, literally one SATA drive and one PCI drive. Its shocking to me they turned such a tiny data set into an article.

Its risky to draw conclusions from such limited data but in this limited scope:

Quote:PCMark 8 gives us a very accurate representation of real-world performance. In terms of storage bandwidth, the Intel platform holds a 21% advantage over AMD.

Conclusion: Intel offers significantly better PCIe storage performance than AMD. However, it's not light years ahead as it has been in the past. Ryzen is very promising, and the difference between it and Intel isn't enough to cause us to be unwilling to recommend Ryzen as a storage platform.

that is a huge difference Looking at the way AMD performs in the results, I think this is another case suggesting latency existing in the pipeline. On the larger bulk data, Ryzen can make it up and even surpass intel.

The cores are really strong in Ryzen, its a huge feat. Not sure what is causing th latency or how they should go about fixing it, but its most likely in the design of the chip. Is it the type of cache or specific to the design, is it the decoding or pipeline?

I am starting to think that Ryzen has some extremely potent cores, high and strong ipc. But it suffers in task that suggest to me there is a heavy hit from latency which multiplies when there are a lot of new unknown task one after another
Reply
#30
https://www.extremetech.com/computing/24...s-not-much
Quote:There’s currently a bit of a gap between how AMD has described the desire for its platforms (strong demand!) and why motherboard manufacturers are apparently having such trouble shipping them. LegitReviews has a lengthy quote from an anonymous company that’s worth a read, basically arguing that AMD cut out the motherboard vendors until the last possible second, saying: “They have done nothing they should have been doing to support the launch platform partners and always delay or give no response on support requests.”

This is in-line with what ExtremeTech has heard from various motherboard vendors, many of whom have been frustrated with AMD’s overall approach to this launch. Some of that frustration may be flowing in both directions, but it definitely may be responsible for choking the flow of motherboards into the channel. We had some issues with our own Ryzen launch platform — issues that were both board-specific and out-of-character for motherboard manufacturers at a major launch.

Motherboard vendors appear to be right that AMD pulled this launch in and pushed for an extremely aggressive rollout. We have no doubt that this caused some problems on the motherboard side of the equation, since UEFI testing and feature specifications take time to implement. It also wouldn’t be surprising if the full lift for a launch like this caught AMD short-handed; the company has slashed headcount significantly since it last launched a new CPU family, and the degree of interest from enthusiasts and motherboard companies means more hardware to validate and more tests to perform. That’s a lot harder for AMD than for Intel, which has far more revenue and employees.

AMD does, however, appear to have a point about demand. So far Ryzen sales appear quite strong, and interest in the platform has been high. If you’re having trouble finding a board, we recommend waiting for some platform reviews and additional launches before picking up hardware, especially given the fairly early state of the platform in general.
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#31
1000% a result of AMD cutting their workforce

they have to learn to manage with what they have or higher more people to deal with these kind of things. Its very important they have good working relationships, loosing connections the need to be reinforcing
Reply
#32
http://www.eteknix.com/nvidia-gtx-1080-t...-i7-5820k/
Looks like eTeknix messed up. As PGR puts it in the comments, "Under NO circumstances should the setup be faster in 1440p in Tomb Raider than it is in 1080p. There is either a major mistake here or the results have problems."
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#33
And AMD admits that the Windows 10 scheduler is working fine with Ryzen: https://www.techpowerup.com/231472/amd-s...-for-ryzen
Quote:The company does still recommend users utilize the "High Performance" plan in their Windows setup for best performance, claiming the software management of CPU speed interferes with Ryzen's native management. There may be an update forthcoming for the Windows "Balanced" plan to fix how it operates with Ryzen, but there will not be a scheduler update planned as of now.
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#34
https://www.techpowerup.com/231473/amd-s...ing-offset
Quote:AMD is now saying reports of poor thermal performance from the flagship Ryzen products can be attributed to a simple thing: Temperature Offsets. Apparently, to keep a "consistent fan policy," AMD has placed a 20C offset on the Ryzen 1700X and 1800X products, making them report temperature a good 20C above what the sensor reads. This interesting design choice may most assuredly be confusing to end users, but AMD is confident software will soon automatically adjust for this offset and report the true temperature when required.
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#35
What???

Craziness man.
Reply
#36
https://www.techpowerup.com/231518/amd-s...m4-updates
Quote:In a blog post titled "Tips for Building a Better AMD Ryzen System", AMD has shed some light on the current memory support quirks with their Ryzen CPUs. First interesting detail: Ryzen processors do not offer memory dividers for DDR4-3000 or DDR4-3400. As such, AMD recommends that users looking to use higher memory speeds with their Ryzen processors instead look towards 3200 or 3500 MT/s. Due to Ryzen's preferences when it comes to memory, AMD also recommends that users pay particular attention to motherboard vendor's memory QVL lists for speeds greater than DDR4-2667.
...
AMD also stressed incoming updates in regards to memory support of its AM4 platform, with updates being pushed to motherboard makers this May, which should enable support for memory at speeds "higher than the current DDR4-3200 limit without refclk adjustments." For reference, see below memory support tables according to memory speed, rank, and quantities supported by Ryzen processors.
[Image: d56bf97e3704.jpg]
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#37
Ryzen 5 lineup accidentally leaked by Guru3D: https://www.techpowerup.com/231519/amd-r...eup-leaked
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#38
Is this Barcelona all over again? https://www.techpowerup.com/231536/amd-r...structions

And Elric couldn't get his Ryzen build to run RAM faster than DDR4-2133:


Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#39
Quote:An important point to note here is that this little known benchmark has been tailored by its developer to be highly specific to the CPU micro-architecture, with separate binaries for each major x64 architecture (eg: Bulldozer, Sandy Bridge, Haswell, Skylake, etc.), and as such the GitHub repository does not have a "Zen" specific binary.

I don't know that I'd call fail on a little used synthetic benchmark, that is coded to each CPU, cause for alarm.

I'd buy a Ryzen if I were in need of a CPU now just to support what they have done here.

I'm a real gamer, so my only display options are 3440 X 1440 or 4K, I don't really care what the 1080P I was using 15 years ago is running like.

AMD did something HUGE here:

They built something that exceeds intel in business apps (most of the market) and still does very well in gaming. (and more importantly to me, with enough juice to get up to the intel levels when high def gaming. I get that they aren't as good in general at gaming, but what they've done here is big.

It's a coup about equal to GStan's one man PC shop getting the worldwide IBM workstation contract instead of Dell.
Reply
#40
We will see what happens with subsequent revisions of Ryzen, the first one is well under-baked IMO, and the chipset/motherboards are a disaster zone.

Business as usual for AMD: a day decade late and a dollar 5 billion dollars short....
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)