• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

·feist·
Member
(04-21-2017, 06:55 AM)
·feist·'s Avatar

Originally Posted by Spooky Scary Skeleton

Looks like I'm gonna opt out for the Intel cpu instead of Ryzen because of how terrible AMD is when it comes to emulating.

Would you mind posting benchmarks for which games and EMUs you're referring to?



Originally Posted by AmyS

I didn't know there was a 16-core / 32 thread version of RyZen for consumer desktops in the pipeline for later this year on the X399 chipset.

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu...re_ryzen_cpu/1

Probably old news to you guys but I haven't been following RyZen all that closely.

Also, Joe Macri on the Disruptive Nature of AMD Ryzen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKqn_E3xai4

Nice find, will watch when I have a moment. TechArp have some good presentations that other sources can miss at times.

We've had some discussion on the claimed 12- and 16-core Zen-based HEDT, though not much.
While it's a curious platform name if true, X399, and the similarly speculated X390, are in some ways more fascinating than the mainstream A3xx/B3xx/X3xx AM4s. The choice for LGA isn't surprising considering the limits of PGA and AMD's history from Socket F through SP3.

Speculation has varied between the use of either SP3r2 or some other server-like variant. When you look at how much more smoothly Ryzen 5 was rolled out in comparison to Ryzen 7, the existence and launch of a possible "Ryzen 9" should be interesting considering which lessons can or can not be carried on from the developments of the AM4 platform.

Seems enthusiasts and Intel alike are closely watching lineup pricing, how successfully AMD can launch a consumer HEDT, and how the market will react.

Particularly with Intel supposedly moving up their launch of Skylake-X, mainstream 6-core(s), etc. in response to Ryzen, it seems things are starting to develop at a more rapid pace for users.
Spooky Scary Skeleton
Member
(04-21-2017, 08:00 AM)
Spooky Scary Skeleton's Avatar

Originally Posted by ·feist·

Would you mind posting benchmarks for which games and EMUs you're referring to?

According to people from r/cemu, people are saying ryzen's performance is lacking compared to intel because of emulator's strict usage of single core.

http://www.legitreviews.com/wp-conte...lphin-1700.jpg
Renekton
Member
(04-21-2017, 08:11 AM)
Renekton's Avatar

Originally Posted by AmyS

I didn't know there was a 16-core / 32 thread version of RyZen for consumer desktops in the pipeline for later this year on the X399 chipset.

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu...re_ryzen_cpu/1

Probably old news to you guys but I haven't

There is also a lower-clocked 12C24T, I think it will make a nice budget server.
Paragon
Member
(04-21-2017, 08:59 AM)
Paragon's Avatar

Originally Posted by Spooky Scary Skeleton

According to people from r/cemu, people are saying ryzen's performance is lacking compared to intel because of emulator's strict usage of single core.
http://www.legitreviews.com/wp-conte...lphin-1700.jpg

I wonder how much of that is optimization.
After running the benchmark, those numbers look about right.
After updating it to the latest version of Dolphin, my result was 22% faster. Still slower than the latest Intel quad-cores, but comparable to those 6950X results.
Of course that speed-up may be universal and not specific to Ryzen.
JohnnyFootball
The Last of Us may be third person, but it is hardly third person.
(04-21-2017, 02:29 PM)
JohnnyFootball's Avatar
Just FYI:

The 1700X can be had TODAY for $350 at Frys with their promo email code since I have no intention of using mine, here it is:

9644073

What happens is you go into Frys pick up the 1700X and tell them you have the email promo code to get $50 off. Just give them the code above. One time use only.
Toe-Knee
Member
(04-21-2017, 04:13 PM)
Toe-Knee's Avatar
Got everything setup today and it's all running smoothly ram works at 3200mhz and it has massively reduced my render times.

The song in working on would offline render at 4.6x real-time with the i5 it trucks along at 21.3x with the 1600 at stock speeds.

That alone is worth it for me as it will drastically reduce my downtime in the studio.

One thing that has really surprised me is the temperatures. Highest I've seen is 46c after running some heavy renders and that's with the bundled cooler as I'm waiting for the bracket for my nepton 240m.

I'll post back with more feedback as I get more time with it.
joesiv
Member
(04-21-2017, 04:36 PM)

Originally Posted by Paragon

I wonder how much of that is optimization.
After running the benchmark, those numbers look about right.
After updating it to the latest version of Dolphin, my result was 22% faster. Still slower than the latest Intel quad-cores, but comparable to those 6950X results.
Of course that speed-up may be universal and not specific to Ryzen.

There could be some optimization improvements, however, given the console code is written for Single Core (Wii) or Triple Core (Wii U), I doube the core advantage would be much of a win for more cores (over 4).

But I don't really know the internal workings of how these emulators work.
Renekton
Member
(04-21-2017, 04:43 PM)
Renekton's Avatar

Originally Posted by Toe-Knee

Got everything setup today and it's all running smoothly ram works at 3200mhz and it has massively reduced my render times.

The song in working on would offline render at 4.6x darkrooms with the i5 it trucks along at 21.3x with the 1600 at stock speeds.

That alone is worth it for me as it will drastically reduce my downtime in the studio.

One thing that has really surprised me is the temperatures. Highest I've seen is 46c after running some heavy renders and that's with the bundled cooler as I'm waiting for the bracket for my nepton 240m.

I'll post back with more feedback as I get more time with it.

That is a nice speed increase, the 1600 and 1700 are really great value buys.

Originally Posted by PFD

It's kind of surreal to see people recommending AMD for mid range and high end builds after so many years of Intel dominance

I am surprised that 1700 gets the nod over 7700K, but I guess Techspot covers mixed applications like productivity as well.
PFD
Member
(04-21-2017, 04:47 PM)
PFD's Avatar

Originally Posted by ·feist·

TechSpot —— The Best CPUs: This is what you should get





It's kind of surreal to see people recommending AMD for mid range and high end builds after so many years of Intel dominance
Toe-Knee
Member
(04-21-2017, 04:55 PM)
Toe-Knee's Avatar

Originally Posted by Renekton

That is a nice speed increase, the 1600 and 1700 are really great value buys.


I am surprised that 1700 gets the nod over 7700K, but I guess Techspot covers mixed applications like productivity as well.


I haven't delved deep yet but it seems to be spot on for audio production.
Paragon
Member
(04-21-2017, 04:55 PM)
Paragon's Avatar

Originally Posted by joesiv

There could be some optimization improvements, however, given the console code is written for Single Core (Wii) or Triple Core (Wii U), I doube the core advantage would be much of a win for more cores (over 4).
But I don't really know the internal workings of how these emulators work.

Oh it's definitely not going to take advantage of any extra cores on Ryzen, I just meant that the code has likely been optimized to run well on Intel CPUs until now, since AMD has not really been a competitive option at all for the past five years.
So that 22% difference I saw from updating to the latest version could be general performance improvements in Dolphin, or it might be due to AMD/Ryzen-specific improvements.

I don't think there is anything they'll be able to do to bring Ryzen's performance on-par with Intel since it's not a task that can really be split up to work across many cores, just that the Ryzen CPUs are probably not quite as far behind on performance as the graph posted above seemed to indicate.
In those results, the R7-1700 at 4GHz is on-par with a 4.5GHz 2700K.
That's not what any other CPU performance test will show, which is why I think those poor results are likely to be an optimization issue.

Originally Posted by Toe-Knee

Got everything setup today and it's all running smoothly ram works at 3200mhz and it has massively reduced my render times.
The song in working on would offline render at 4.6x darkrooms with the i5 it trucks along at 21.3x with the 1600 at stock speeds.
That alone is worth it for me as it will drastically reduce my downtime in the studio.

That mirrors my own first impressions when I got my 1700X set up.
I don't know if it's just that most sites seem to use the same applications for testing, and many of them are not well multithreaded, but I think the performance gap between an older i5 and these Ryzen CPUs was massively undersold - particularly in non-gaming tasks.
Toe-Knee
Member
(04-21-2017, 05:09 PM)
Toe-Knee's Avatar

Originally Posted by Paragon

Oh it's definitely not going to take advantage of any extra cores on Ryzen, I just meant that the code has likely been optimized to run well on Intel CPUs until now, since AMD has not really been a competitive option at all for the past five years.
So that 22% difference I saw from updating to the latest version could be general performance improvements in Dolphin, or it might be due to AMD/Ryzen-specific improvements.

I don't think there is anything they'll be able to do to bring Ryzen's performance on-par with Intel since it's not a task that can really be split up to work across many cores, just that the Ryzen CPUs are probably not quite as far behind on performance as the graph posted above seemed to indicate.
In those results, the R7-1700 at 4GHz is on-par with a 4.5GHz 2700K.
That's not what any other CPU performance test will show, which is why I think those poor results are likely to be an optimization issue.



That mirrors my own first impressions when I got my 1700X set up.
I don't know if it's just that most sites seem to use the same applications for testing, and many of them are not well multithreaded, but I think the performance gap between an older i5 and these Ryzen CPUs was massively undersold - particularly in non-gaming tasks.


That must be it as I didn't expect the jump to be anywhere near as big from reviews etc.
Datschge
Member
(04-21-2017, 05:30 PM)
Datschge's Avatar

Originally Posted by Anger Fog

The single-thread instructions per clock rate of Ryzen is higher than for any Intel processor, except for 256-bit vector code. I am testing the Ryzen right now and the test results are coming soon. Please be patient.

http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=829

Anger Fog is the author of extensive documentation on software optimization at http://www.agner.org/optimize/
Among other things he also has repeatedly documented over the years how Intel's compiler and diverse maths libraries are optimizing for very specific Intel CPUs only, leading to ridiculous cases where just changing the CPUID significantly increases the performance as well as AMD's own maths library running faster on Intel as Intel's Fortran compiler is the best available. http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49&v=f
Khaz
Member
(04-21-2017, 06:08 PM)
Khaz's Avatar

Originally Posted by ·feist·

TechSpot —— The Best CPUs: This is what you should get

Best Budget CPU

Until Rizen 3?
That would be quite a domination.
SRG01
Member
(04-21-2017, 06:12 PM)
SRG01's Avatar

Originally Posted by Datschge

http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=829

Anger Fog is the author of extensive documentation on software optimization at http://www.agner.org/optimize/
Among other things he also has repeatedly documented over the years how Intel's compiler and diverse maths libraries are optimizing for very specific Intel CPUs only, leading to ridiculous cases where just changing the CPUID significantly increases the performance as well as AMD's own maths library running faster on Intel as Intel's Fortran compiler is the best available. http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49&v=f

Holy... what? Single-Thread IPC performance may actually be better than Intel's with the exception of 256-bit Vector?

I'm finding that extremely hard to believe for some reason.
spyshagg
Should not be allowed to breed
(04-21-2017, 06:29 PM)
spyshagg's Avatar

Originally Posted by SRG01

Holy... what? Single-Thread IPC performance may actually be better than Intel's with the exception of 256-bit Vector?

I'm finding that extremely hard to believe for some reason.

You see it in some applications, but the key word here is "per clock", which intel has much more of.
Mr Swine
Banned
(04-21-2017, 07:06 PM)

Originally Posted by spyshagg

You see it in some applications, but the key word here is "per clock", which intel has much more of.

How does Ryzen fair against a 7700k if it could potentially clock as well as it at 5Ghz?
Nachtmaer
Member
(04-21-2017, 07:24 PM)
Nachtmaer's Avatar

Originally Posted by Mr Swine

How does Ryzen fair against a 7700k if it could potentially clock as well as it at 5Ghz?

I think it's around 5-10% in favour of the 7700k depending on the workload, maybe less in some cases. Obviously when using AVX2 Intel does a lot better. I saw some benchmarks which had both clocked at 3GHz, but I can't remember which review it was from.

Needless to say, AMD finally have a good baseline to improve upon in the upcoming years. Now all they need is a process that allows them to clock higher.
spyshagg
Should not be allowed to breed
(04-21-2017, 08:40 PM)
spyshagg's Avatar

Originally Posted by Mr Swine

How does Ryzen fair against a 7700k if it could potentially clock as well as it at 5Ghz?

Here is your answer (with both at 4ghz) in games:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOsYOASddeo&

In single threaded apps it would fare ~7% worse on average.
In multi threaded, it always wins (16 vs 8... Even if it was 16 vs 16 it would probably win, as AMD SMT is proving to be a silver bullet)
Datschge
Member
(04-21-2017, 09:37 PM)
Datschge's Avatar

Originally Posted by SRG01

Holy... what? Single-Thread IPC performance may actually be better than Intel's with the exception of 256-bit Vector?

I'm finding that extremely hard to believe for some reason.

If you followed technical discussions around Ryzen's design this is actually less surprising than it seems. One already mentioned caveat is the "per clock", the other one is "instructions". Every Ryzen core can handle up to 6 instructions per cycle (IPC), and that allows its SMT implementation to fare as well as it does (usually better than Intel's HT without any negative impact since the AGESA 1.0.0.4 update). Common workloads in today's code are 2 IPC. On Ryzen with SMT every core can handle 2x 3 IPC, without SMT that would be 6 IPC, and code optimized for that would indeed have the highest single-thread performance as well.
Renekton
Member
(04-22-2017, 04:49 AM)
Renekton's Avatar

Originally Posted by Nachtmaer

I think it's around 5-10% in favour of the 7700k depending on the workload, maybe less in some cases. Obviously when using AVX2 Intel does a lot better. I saw some benchmarks which had both clocked at 3GHz, but I can't remember which review it was from.

Needless to say, AMD finally have a good baseline to improve upon in the upcoming years. Now all they need is a process that allows them to clock higher.

About that... watch GF stumble trying to jump to 7nm, Richard Hendricks style.

I wonder if AMD is able to speed up inter-CCX communication in future revisions.
Nostremitus
Member
(04-22-2017, 05:12 AM)
Nostremitus's Avatar

Originally Posted by Renekton

About that... watch GF stumble trying to jump to 7nm, Richard Hendricks style.

I wonder if AMD is able to speed up inter-CCX communication in future revisions.

It'd be cool if they could decouple infinity fabric and ram speeds.
DemonCleaner
Junior Member
(04-22-2017, 11:29 AM)
DemonCleaner's Avatar

Originally Posted by Nostremitus

It'd be cool if they could decouple infinity fabric and ram speeds.

wouldn't need to decouple it. would be enough if they ran it at full RAM speed and not half. not sure, why they aren't doing this right now? probably too much heat..
Paragon
Member
(04-22-2017, 12:12 PM)
Paragon's Avatar

Originally Posted by DemonCleaner

wouldn't need to decouple it. would be enough if they ran it at full RAM speed and not half. not sure, why they aren't doing this right now? probably too much heat..

It does run at the full memory command rate.
People seem to have forgotten the "double data rate" part of DDR memory because MHz is so frequently used (incorrectly) in place of MT/s.
2666 MT/s DDR4 is only running at a 1333MHz clockspeed for example.

I'm not convinced that it's such a big deal now though.
In games, I've never seen more than a 5 FPS gain going from 2666MT/s to 3600MT/s.
Nostremitus
Member
(04-22-2017, 12:18 PM)
Nostremitus's Avatar

Originally Posted by Paragon

It does run at the full memory command rate.
People seem to have forgotten the "double data rate" part of DDR memory because MHz is so frequently used (incorrectly) in place of MT/s.
2666 MT/s DDR4 is only running at a 1333MHz clockspeed for example.

I'm not convinced that it's such a big deal now though.
In games, I've never seen more than a 5 FPS gain going from 2666MT/s to 3600MT/s.

Doesn't it have a larger effect on minimums?
Paragon
Member
(04-22-2017, 12:19 PM)
Paragon's Avatar

Originally Posted by Nostremitus

Doesn't it have a larger effect on minimums?

I've only been testing minimums.
I don't care about average/maximum framerates nearly as much.
Nostremitus
Member
(04-22-2017, 12:27 PM)
Nostremitus's Avatar

Originally Posted by Paragon

I've only been testing minimums.
I don't care about average/maximum framerates nearly as much.

Ah, OK.
Renekton
Member
(04-22-2017, 12:28 PM)
Renekton's Avatar
Faster memory benefit is hard to say right now because results vary so wildly between tech sites and may be setting-dependent (Ultra setting needed to bring out the difference?). GN finds it mostly impacting the 0.1% low, while LTT finds significant impact on the 97% percentile. Intel also benefits the same way from faster memory in same games.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_Yt4vSZKVk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cHJ7FDZKg8
DemonCleaner
Junior Member
(04-22-2017, 02:45 PM)
DemonCleaner's Avatar

Originally Posted by Paragon

It does run at the full memory command rate.
People seem to have forgotten the "double data rate" part of DDR memory because MHz is so frequently used (incorrectly) in place of MT/s.
2666 MT/s DDR4 is only running at a 1333MHz clockspeed for example.

oh well, thanks for clarifying. stupid me never knew this.
Nachtmaer
Member
(04-22-2017, 08:15 PM)
Nachtmaer's Avatar

Originally Posted by Paragon

It does run at the full memory command rate.
People seem to have forgotten the "double data rate" part of DDR memory because MHz is so frequently used (incorrectly) in place of MT/s.
2666 MT/s DDR4 is only running at a 1333MHz clockspeed for example.

I'm not convinced that it's such a big deal now though.
In games, I've never seen more than a 5 FPS gain going from 2666MT/s to 3600MT/s.

I saw The Stilt mention that he was able to get the IF to run at a 1:1 ratio (or double if you're counting DDR), but it was only for debugging purposes. It was speculated that perhaps this AMD's plan all along but they decided to halve it for (stability/functional) reasons. Who knows this might change with Zen 2.

On the topic of clocks and process, there were a few rumors a while ago about Naples using a B2 stepping instead of B1. Not that I'm expecting any big differences from a metal respin yet, but maybe those chips will come to AM4 for a mid-gen refresh like Devil's Canyon.
·feist·
Member
(04-24-2017, 07:21 AM)
·feist·'s Avatar

Originally Posted by Paragon

The 1700X/1800X should be better binned so that they should run at the same clockspeeds at a lower power consumption.
The 1700's lower power consumption comes from it having lower clockspeeds. (stock)
There have also been reports that the memory controller on many 1700s does not seem to be as robust as the 1700X/1800X and may not be as good at handling faster memory speeds.

Temperature comparisons are skewed because the X CPUs have up to a 20C temperature offset for some reason.
My 1700X at 3.9GHz reports "73C" running Intel Burn Test (maximum heat/stress) which would be about equal to the 1700 results you've quoted, when you factor in the offset. (53C)

The motherboard size shouldn't affect this.
Trying to use an air cooler on an 8-core CPU in a cramped mITX build might cause you to run into thermal throttling though - but it can be done. A lot of that depends on the case/cooler.
Linus Tech Tips put a 145W Xeon into one of the smallest PC cases there are, and used an air cooler for it.

The current Ryzen processors are only CPUs, not APUs. They don't have an integrated GPU.
Basically, AMD put another 4 CPU cores in place of an iGPU.
More than half the chip in Intel's quad-core CPUs is the iGPU now.

Resolution in games is 99% determined by your GPU. The CPU affects minimum framerates more than anything else.
So you need a really fast CPU if you want to keep minimum framerates above 120 FPS, less-fast for 60 FPS, and even less for 30 FPS - which is why console games are mostly 30.
Since higher resolutions are going to run at lower framerates anyway due to the GPU, the CPU matters a lot less for 4K60 than if you were trying to run a game at 1080p240.
It's not a bad CPU for gaming by any means, just not necessarily the best across all games - though it can often be second or third on the list.
Its performance in many non-gaming applications can make up for that though, depending on your requirements. It can be twice as fast as a 7700K in some applications.
And even where it's not the best, it's still been a significant upgrade from my i5-2500K in all cases.

Check that the programs you want to run can actually use 8 cores though.
Nearly all of Adobe's programs other than Premiere will not benefit from more than 4. The same could be true of CAD programs.
A lot of these programs would probably benefit greatly if they were well multithreaded, but the codebase is so old that it would be a massive undertaking.

Hoosier Hardware —— Huge Gains in Adobe Premiere Pro for Ryzen Owners

Anyone want to test the validity of these gains?



Originally Posted by PFD

It's kind of surreal to see people recommending AMD for mid range and high end builds after so many years of Intel dominance

It's all the more surreal when, in an increasing number of cases, the argument has to be made as to why you would buy the Intel over a similarly priced AMD.

Skylake-X should have increases in stock and OC clocks, along with higher IPC compared to Broadwell-E. Along with the supposed X390/X399 HEDT, AMD will obviously need a combination of respin(s), more mature process and IPC improvements to keep pace.

Even if it's a very incremental step, at some point something must change with the current price:performance from Intel.
sechsterangriff
Member
(04-24-2017, 11:15 AM)
sechsterangriff's Avatar
My understanding is that with most of these applications only rendering processes are actually targeting multi-threading. So performance gains in those seem natural to me.
When it comes to the main programs, then yes, I'm assuming changing the code base must be a huge effort. Multi-thread/core processors are far from being a new thing but these are still underutilized.
TC McQueen
Member
(04-24-2017, 02:47 PM)
TC McQueen's Avatar
BTW, if you got a Cryorig cooler for your Ryzen build, they're finally shipping out brackets en masse:
Blizniak
Member
(04-24-2017, 05:50 PM)
Blizniak's Avatar

Originally Posted by TC McQueen

BTW, if you got a Cryorig cooler for your Ryzen build, they're finally shipping out brackets en masse

Amazon just shipped my 1600 so I immediately applied for one.
JohnnyFootball
The Last of Us may be third person, but it is hardly third person.
(04-24-2017, 05:53 PM)
JohnnyFootball's Avatar

Originally Posted by ·feist·

Hoosier Hardware —— Huge Gains in Adobe Premiere Pro for Ryzen Owners

Anyone want to test the validity of these gains?



It's all the more surreal when, in an increasing number of cases, the argument has to be made as to why you would buy the Intel over a similarly priced AMD.

Skylake-X should have increases in stock and OC clocks, along with higher IPC compared to Broadwell-E. Along with the supposed X390/X399 HEDT, AMD will obviously need a combination of respin(s), more mature process and IPC improvements to keep pace.

Even if it's a very incremental step, at some point something must change with the current price:performance from Intel.

If Intel wanted to really and I mean really put the pressure on AMD, they should release a 6-core Kaby Lake Processor with similar speeds to the 7700K and price it the same as the 7700K. the could then drop the price of thje 7700K.

If they did that, Kaby Lake would be an easy choice for me.
Alcachofa
Junior Member
(04-24-2017, 06:08 PM)
Alcachofa's Avatar
This will probably only interest those of us who are in the EU and willing to wait 1 to 2 months, but 228,98 € on amazon.fr for a Ryzen 5 1600X sounds like a great deal to me.

masterkajo
Member
(04-24-2017, 07:22 PM)
masterkajo's Avatar

Originally Posted by Alcachofa

This will probably only interest those of us who are in the EU and willing to wait 1 to 2 months, but 228,98 € on amazon.fr for a Ryzen 5 1600X sounds like a great deal to me.

Yeah pretty great. Amazon.fr had the 1600 for about 210€ a couple of days ago. I ordered one and they dispatched it today. Looking forward to installing it.

I don't like the fact that the hyper 212 can only be installed facing up. Either I stay on the wraith and do some mild oc or I get a noctua NH-u12s and do heavy oc which I should do considering I have a 1080ti on order.
Mr Swine
Banned
(04-24-2017, 07:26 PM)

Originally Posted by masterkajo

Yeah pretty great. Amazon.fr had the 1600 for about 210€ a couple of days ago. I ordered one and they dispatched it today. Looking forward to installing it.

I don't like the fact that the hyper 212 can only be installed facing up. Either I stay on the wraith and do some mild oc or I get a noctua NH-u12s and do heavy oc which I should do considering I have a 1080ti on order.

Does the Noctua NH-U12 Cool down the CPU as much as on the 1700x as well as the 1600x if I OC?
Hesemonni
Junior Member
(04-24-2017, 08:00 PM)
Hesemonni's Avatar
Isn't 1600x like 270€ without that deal? So wait 1-2 months to save 50€?
Nachtmaer
Member
(04-24-2017, 08:58 PM)
Nachtmaer's Avatar

Originally Posted by masterkajo

Yeah pretty great. Amazon.fr had the 1600 for about 210€ a couple of days ago. I ordered one and they dispatched it today. Looking forward to installing it.

I don't like the fact that the hyper 212 can only be installed facing up. Either I stay on the wraith and do some mild oc or I get a noctua NH-u12s and do heavy oc which I should do considering I have a 1080ti on order.

If you're actually getting an NH-U12S, you might want to consider a Thermalright True Spirit Power or Direct. The Power is basically up there with all the other high end dual tower coolers for the same price as an NH-U12S. The Direct is cheaper and performs slightly worse. Both still outdo an NH-U12S though. Might want to check case compatibility since these guys are pretty tall.

Originally Posted by Mr Swine

Does the Noctua NH-U12 Cool down the CPU as much as on the 1700x as well as the 1600x if I OC?

A 1700X will obviously use more power and have a higher heat output. Since these coolers are designed to handle a lot more than that, I'm sure the difference in temps isn't going to be that big. It's hard to say without doing an apples to apples comparison.
Blizniak
Member
(04-25-2017, 12:06 AM)
Blizniak's Avatar

Originally Posted by Hesemonni

Isn't 1600x like 270€ without that deal? So wait 1-2 months to save 50€?

It only says 1-2 months because they're out of stock and keep selling so the date automatically moves further away. It said the same thing when I ordered 1600 last week and it shipped today.
masterkajo
Member
(04-25-2017, 12:11 AM)
masterkajo's Avatar

Originally Posted by Nachtmaer

If you're actually getting an NH-U12S, you might want to consider a Thermalright True Spirit Power or Direct. The Power is basically up there with all the other high end dual tower coolers for the same price as an NH-U12S. The Direct is cheaper and performs slightly worse. Both still outdo an NH-U12S though. Might want to check case compatibility since these guys are pretty tall.



A 1700X will obviously use more power and have a higher heat output. Since these coolers are designed to handle a lot more than that, I'm sure the difference in temps isn't going to be that big. It's hard to say without doing an apples to apples comparison.

Thanks for the tipps. Though as a fellow Austrian I have to support Noctua :)
I will wait and see what my 1600 can do before deciding on a cooling solution. I will try the wraith and see if I can manage 4GHz with a reasonable voltage and if so I will think about a good cooling solution. Otherwise I might stick with a lower clock and the stock cooler.
Oachkatzlschwoaf
Member
(04-25-2017, 12:18 AM)
Oachkatzlschwoaf's Avatar
Has anyone seen an air cooler round-up including the wraith spire? I want to know how much better a good tower cooler would be, before I too support my countries pride in cooling technology.
SRG01
Member
(04-25-2017, 12:28 AM)
SRG01's Avatar

Originally Posted by spyshagg

You see it in some applications, but the key word here is "per clock", which intel has much more of.

Originally Posted by Datschge

If you followed technical discussions around Ryzen's design this is actually less surprising than it seems. One already mentioned caveat is the "per clock", the other one is "instructions". Every Ryzen core can handle up to 6 instructions per cycle (IPC), and that allows its SMT implementation to fare as well as it does (usually better than Intel's HT without any negative impact since the AGESA 1.0.0.4 update). Common workloads in today's code are 2 IPC. On Ryzen with SMT every core can handle 2x 3 IPC, without SMT that would be 6 IPC, and code optimized for that would indeed have the highest single-thread performance as well.

Oops, sorry. I'm not subbed and totally forgot about this thread.

Upon reading these responses, that actually sounds about right. Too bad Ryzen OCs aren't that great right now...
TC McQueen
Member
(04-25-2017, 12:36 AM)
TC McQueen's Avatar

Originally Posted by Oachkatzlschwoaf

Has anyone seen an air cooler round-up including the wraith spire? I want to know how much better a good tower cooler would be, before I too support my countries pride in cooling technology.

Here's a video comparing it to the Hyper 212:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNjkDoYZYjU

Basically, anything that's as good as or better than the Hyper 212 is a big improvement over the Wraith Spire.
Oachkatzlschwoaf
Member
(04-25-2017, 12:50 AM)
Oachkatzlschwoaf's Avatar

Originally Posted by TC McQueen

Here's a video comparing it to the Hyper 212:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNjkDoYZYjU

Basically, anything that's as good as or better than the Hyper 212 is a big improvement over the Wraith Spire.

Thanks. Seems like my overclocked 1700 really deserves something better.
hanspampel
Banned
(04-25-2017, 12:56 AM)

Originally Posted by masterkajo

Yeah pretty great. Amazon.fr had the 1600 for about 210€ a couple of days ago. I ordered one and they dispatched it today. Looking forward to installing it.

I don't like the fact that the hyper 212 can only be installed facing up. Either I stay on the wraith and do some mild oc or I get a noctua NH-u12s and do heavy oc which I should do considering I have a 1080ti on order.

Got mine too today. Also a 30 discount on top.
Amazon is great and i do think i got big value for my money.

But i still dislike the overclock potential of ryzen. Maybe i upgrade to 8 core ryzen 2 next year of there are huge improvements in that area.
Otherwise i keep the cpu for a while
Memorabilia
Member
(04-25-2017, 01:09 AM)
Ok, I feel like this is going to be a bit of a silly question but...I see people discussing using Hyper 212s, Noctuas, etc...

So, is it generally possible to re-purpose most/all Socket AM3+/FM2+ coolers for Socket AM4? I was under the impression I might need to buy a new cooler, but I have a CoolerMaster waterblock in my AM3+ (FX-6350) mini-tower, low profile Scythe Big Shuriken 2 in my slim-line mITX HTPC (FM2+, 860K), and a Noctua NH-L9a low-profile on standby that hasn't been installed in my other yet-to-be-built small FF HTPC. So...I have (3) AMD AM3+/FM2+ coolers ready to go (plus a ProlimaTech Samuel 17 low profile HS + 140mm slimline fan new in box as well...yeah, I like me some low-profile gear lol).

All I'm waiting for is confirmation/availability of an ASRock mITX board and I'll be building out my first Ryzen 1600/1600X HTPC. If I can re-use the coolers I already have then I'll definitely be getting the 1600X. If not, then I'll most likely get the 1600 since it comes with a HSF cooler....
Papacheeks
Junior Member
(04-25-2017, 01:11 AM)
Papacheeks's Avatar
Just got my AM4 bracket from Deep Cool for my Gamer Storm Captain 240EX, and my Phanteks White sleeved PSU extenders.

Just waiting on the case which will arrive tomorrow and the Ryzen build will commence!
masterkajo
Member
(04-25-2017, 01:14 AM)
masterkajo's Avatar

Originally Posted by Memorabilia

Ok, I feel like this is going to be a bit of a silly question but...I see people discussing using Hyper 212s, Noctuas, etc...

So, is it generally possible to re-purpose most/all Socket AM3+/FM2+ coolers for Socket AM4? I was under the impression I might need to buy a new cooler, but I have a CoolerMaster waterblock in my AM3+ (FX-6350) mini-tower, low profile Scythe Big Shuriken 2 in my slim-line mITX HTPC (FM2+, 860K), and a Noctua NH-L9a low-profile on standby that hasn't been installed in my other yet-to-be-built small FF HTPC. So...I have (3) AMD AM3+/FM2+ coolers ready to go (plus a ProlimaTech Samuel 17 low profile HS + 140mm slimline fan new in box as well...yeah, I like me some low-profile gear lol).

All I'm waiting for is confirmation/availability of an ASRock mITX board and I'll be building out my first Ryzen 1600/1600X HTPC. If I can re-use the coolers I already have then I'll definitely be getting the 1600X. If not, then I'll most likely get the 1600 since it comes with a HSF cooler....

Noctua is offering a special edition for the NH-U12S with AM4 brackets. But most existing coolers can be installed on the AM4 boards with a upgrade kit you have to order from the cooler manifacturer. Mostly for free + shipping.

Thread Tools