-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AMD Ryzen CPUs will launch by March 3
- Thread starter TC McQueen
- Start date
Oh my, if this benches well its going to be my next build at years end. Theres is a high chance of it being my first full AMD build.
Welp, this will replace my 3570k!
opticalmace
Member
I preordered the Asus Prime X370 board. Would prefer to wait and see but it should be a safe bet (and can cancel or change in store on launch if there's a reason to avoid it).
Oh my, if this benches well its going to be my next build at years end. Theres is a high chance of it being my first full AMD build.
Im gonna get this one. I've given access to my Plex server to so many people that my 2500 is having a hard time keeping up if multiple people are watching 1080p movies(I transcode remote streams to 720p because I have Comcast bandwidth caps). This will do nicely.
TatteredHat
Member
I'm not preordering it just yet but I'll probably go for that one as well, I had the Asus Prime Z270 lined up for my white build previously and this one seems identical.
my thoughts exactly, have the 1700 pre-ordered, will wait for possible 1600x leaks to decide if I follow through with it (currently on a 3570 like you)
I'll probably go with a 1400X or a 1600X myself. Replacing the same cpu. hopefully I can recoup some of the cost by selling these old parts
Biostar has some coming, but not at launch it seems.
dr_rus
Member
First game performance leak?
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-gaming-performance-benchmarks-leak/
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-gaming-performance-benchmarks-leak/
sleepnaught
Member
I sure hope not, yikes.First game performance leak?
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-gaming-performance-benchmarks-leak/
What is this one in the table at the bottom referring to? Hadnt heard of it before.
Ryzen 7 Pro 1700
And they list it at less than the base 1700.
First game performance leak?
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-gaming-performance-benchmarks-leak/
3.0 ghz stock of the 1700 does it no favors. Still, the average is alright.
How well does GTA V scale with CPU parallelism?
Those are a much larger factor in how a game feels to play than averages.
No, if you have to look at FPS at all, look at minimum FPS.
Those are a much larger factor in how a game feels to play than averages.
papersleeves
Member
sleepnaught
Member
The minimum is what concerns me. And is it not boosting to 3.7ghz? If not, then okay. But if it is, I'm worried.
RenegadeXV8
Banned
Not well at all. It cares more about single threaded performance more than anything. A 6700K beats out a 6950X, for instance.
General Lee
Member
Taken from the GTA V built in benchmark? Seems kinda drastic low numbers even for Intel. Can't get stable 60 FPS even with 5GHz 7700K, really? I'm not sure how reliable the min max numbers are, they could be just a couple of frames and not significant overall. The average seems perfectly fine for a 1700, but not sure how GPU limited the bench is at those settings. The stock vs. 5 Ghz result doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
ethomaz
Banned
If you want to look something then it is the minimum.
So it seems to actually scale on par with most current games.golem chart:
-chart.png)
5960X@2,4Ghz(HT off)
Aztechnology
Member
Yup I did the same. I was on a 970 and went to 1070. Stopgap to see what happens with the higher end Nvidia and AMD cards. My 970 was just depreciating and I managed to sell it for $260-280 I don't remember. It was rediculous.
Not bad, I never expected it to beat 7700k in gaming at stock settings... I am interested how it performs when overclocked to 4.0+ Ghz though.First game performance leak?
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-gaming-performance-benchmarks-leak/
LelouchZero
Member
First game performance leak?
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-gaming-performance-benchmarks-leak/
First game performance leak?
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-gaming-performance-benchmarks-leak/
It looks like it may be at 3.4GHz judging by the other benchmark. If this is legit that's versus a 4C8T Kaby at 4.5 and 5GHz, if so that's not even bad.
At 4GHz it should be around 17% faster, and if it can reach 4.4GHz it would be around 29% faster so possibly around 36 fps. The 4.5GHz Kaby-lake would be 5.5% faster than a Ryzen at 4.4GHz here.
In Digital Foundry's testing in March 2016 it appears that the 4C8T Skylake outpaced the 6 and 8 core Haswell-E CPUs in GTA V so it seemingly prefers faster single-core performance, from what I've seen, the game doesn't scale to well past 4 cores, and more threads appear to improve the frametimes.
Interestingly they don't appear to have a minimum frame-rate table as I've seen before in previous reviews, however they have video with a couple of seconds of footage and Richard's own analysis of the performance.
Article: Core i7 Face-Off: which is the fastest gaming CPU?
(Video)
golem chart:
5960X@2,4Ghz(HT off)
Interesting, I've never seen this game scale on 8 cores before.
There's also the cinebench benchmark in that article that's interesting:
It does show that the 1700 does have much worse single threaded performance than the 7700k even if the multithread is better(well, 8 core). AMD was notably avoiding single threaded comparisons for the 1700 and 1700x even though they made the comparison with the 1800x.
[/url]
It does show that the 1700 does have much worse single threaded performance than the 7700k even if the multithread is better(well, 8 core). AMD was notably avoiding single threaded comparisons for the 1700 and 1700x even though they made the comparison with the 1800x.
Frankfurter
Member
First game performance leak?
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-gaming-performance-benchmarks-leak/
The i7-7700k benches are obviously fake or bad benchmarking. Look at the min., avg. and max. frames. i7 7700k stock is at 89fps avg. vs. 88fps avg. for the i7 7700k @5Ghz, while the 7700k @5Ghz is way ahead in both min. and max. fps.
RenegadeXV8
Banned
Me neither, which is why I made my previous post about it not scaling very well. This is from GamersNexus testing:
Hyperthreading off shows better minimums than Hyperthreading on? There's no reason for that unless the game hates more threads at certain settings.
Given the way a mathematical mean works, that is unlikely but not impossible.
Another reason why a frametime distribution chart (or even just 99% frametime if you want a single number) is a much better metric for game performance than aggregate FPS.
It might dislike hyperthreading but still scale with additional hardware cores. Scheduling is complicated.
papersleeves
Member
Well, to be fair, I don't think anyone is expecting Ryzen to beat Kaby Lake on single threaded test. Even if the 1700 was overclocked to the same speed (4.5ghz), I don't think it would beat it, but it would undoubtedly be closer than it is at 3.4ghz. I'm thinking maybe in the 1.80-2.00 range? Hard to know. Still would not be as good, but considering you have twice the core with twice the HT, you're ending up with a better multi-purpose cpu, as well as a more future proof cpu for less than the price of the 7700K.
This is all just speculation though, but we do know games are heading toward multi-threading more and more. That accounts for something, right?
LelouchZero
Member
I'm not sure about the legitimacy of those benchmarks but the 'Extended Draw Distance; setting is a real fps killer if you crank that to 100%, I saw a video with a i7-6950X at 4GHz and it dropped below 80 fps at a few points with this slider cranked up here: Grand Theft Auto V | Titan X Pascal SLI | 3440x1440 | Acer Predator X34 | 60FPS
You can see the GPU usage of the two GPUs dropping along with the framerate hinting at it being CPU bound.
I wonder how much a quicker set of memory could possibly help out the performance in these situations? They're using 3000MHz which is a pretty solid speed for DDR4 ram but I've seen a benchmark at TechSpot where 4000MHz memory could provide a notably boost to performance... While also potentially breaking bank if you want 16GB+
TechSpot: DDR4 Memory at 4000 MT/s, Does It Make a Difference?
It seems Fallout 4 scales the best out of the 6 games they tested, I wonder if they're mostly GPU bound for the other 5 games? They used 2 980 Ti cards at 1440p.
papersleeves
Member
Yea if its real, i still wouldnt expect the r7s to clock as high as a kabylake would. However maybe a r5 or r3 might?
papersleeves
Member
I just ran the benchmark for GTA V at 1080p on my system for the first time. I am using Kaby Lake at 4.8 GHz currently, with 32GB 3600 RAM. It is really a strange benchmark. It ran like 188FPS almost all the time, but would occasionally crater to 50 for a split second. I didn't really see a good reason for this, but almost like it was hitting the hard drive for some data that held things up, which wouldn't be very good design.
There are a lot of settings too. Who knows how they had it setup.
There are a lot of settings too. Who knows how they had it setup.
papersleeves
Member
Maybe if you run it twice, you won't get those lower values?
Yeah, chart is weird.
Nostremitus
Member
Hmm, I wonder how well a NH-D15 will do overclocking the 1700X...
Also, I wonder what kind of difference in performance we will see between when the CPU first runs a program vs when it's run it for the 5th or 6th time... If SenseMI actually works as advertised.
Also, I wonder what kind of difference in performance we will see between when the CPU first runs a program vs when it's run it for the 5th or 6th time... If SenseMI actually works as advertised.
I don't know why you think that it would be "fake" or "bad benchmarking".
Averages and maximum framerates are often reliant on GPU performance, while minimums are nearly always CPU-bound.
That's why Anandtech's tests that only look at average framerates show hardly any difference between CPUs.
This was exactly what I was concerned about with Ryzen having 8 slower-clocked, lower-IPC cores.
That's great if your application can support it, but the majority right now do not.
So far, the fastest RAM advertised as being supported is DDR4-3200 for AM4 motherboards, so 4000 is probably unlikely. You might be able to use DDR4-3600 RAM with them though.
Apparently AMD are sending out review samples with 3000MHz Corsair RAM.
Kaby Lake boards support DDR4-4266.
It was a pretty boring demo but I can try.
Technically they do, but it's no slam dunk unless you have access to several CPU samples and aren't afraid to go wild with voltage. I had a heck of a time just getting some good 3866 RAM going.
GTA V has some issues above 160fps at least with i5s. Gamersnexus removed it from their future CPU benchmarks because of it.
Minimum is also pretty useless as it could just be that low for 1 frame, we really need 0,1% lows.
Minimum is also pretty useless as it could just be that low for 1 frame, we really need 0,1% lows.
LelouchZero
Member
Yeah I was just looking for this, I saw it a few days ago and was wondering if Weevilone was having the same issue. Very interesting.
Do you have an i5? You might want to check the above post if you do.