dirtyferret
Posts: 904 +1,285
That's not a benchmark that is a press release that ryzen 2 is coming, you stated it was already faster then Intel. Show me the comparison benchmarks!
That's not a benchmark that is a press release that ryzen 2 is coming, you stated it was already faster then Intel. Show me the comparison benchmarks!
7700K hits 4.5GHz max turbo, 8700K hits 4.7GHz.
7700K has 8MB cache, 8700K has 12MB.
That's not a benchmark that is a press release that ryzen 2 is coming, you stated it was already faster then Intel. Show me the comparison benchmarks!
So current Intel CPU's won't have a chance.
One review I would really like to see is an i5 8400 (6/6) vs a 7700K (4/8) vs a 8700K (6/12) with all CPU's at 5.0GHz.
Do you not understand english? I am being dead honest as that would be a viable reason for you not understanding my request. You have now avoided my request twice hiding behind a press release.
YOU STATED RYZEN 2 WAS FASTER THEN CURRENT INTEL CHIPS SHOW ME THE BENCHMARKS.
If you need help to translate the above line into your native tongue the following link can help.
https://translate.google.com/
I STATED RYZEN 2 WILL BE FASTER THAN CURRENT INTEL CHIPS.
Did I say it IS faster? No.
So you’re saying that 720p testing won’t matter in the future because games are GPU limited? Games are GPU limited now mate! You’ve just sidestepped the point. It is absolutely reasonable to assume that if chip a is faster than chip b today then the same will be true of games released in the future. Ryzen is slower than Intel at gaming today and will continue to be in the future, at least to make this assumption is not unreasonable based on current testing. It would be unreasonable to assume that AMD’s chips will overtake Intels chips.i7-8700K is faster than i7-7700K and it's 6C/12T...
Show me slides where draw call increase equals FPS increase? Point with DX12 is that with DX11 you cannot make good use of multiple cores because performance is heavily limited by one main thread. With DX12 that major problem is not present.
Gaming is always limited by GPU performance (not counting titles where graphic quality is so low that GPU limits anyway). So faster GPU > bigger resolution > GPU is still limiting factor.
Not difficult logic either. Also future games will be different than today's games when it comes to CPU usage.
Ryzen 2 will be faster than current Intel's and current Ryzen users don't need new motheboard for that. Intel users however will need new motherboard for CPU's faster than Ryzen 2.
So you’re saying that 720p testing won’t matter in the future because games are GPU limited? Games are GPU limited now mate! You’ve just sidestepped the point. It is absolutely reasonable to assume that if chip a is faster than chip b today then the same will be true of games released in the future. Ryzen is slower than Intel at gaming today and will continue to be in the future, at least to make this assumption is not unreasonable based on current testing. It would be unreasonable to assume that AMD’s chips will overtake Intels chips.
And funny, the “wait for Ryzen 2” chants are already out, the AMD fandom waited 5 years for Ryzen and 6 months in now we have to wait for Ryzen 2?! Ryzen 2 needs to be faster for AMDs sake, it’s definitely not a given though, I expected Ryzen 1 to be better than Intel mostly because of the hype. It wasn’t, close but second best and crucially, not an upgrade for existing Intel systems over the last 5 years. Ryzen 2 is roadmapped for 2019 but I’d take that with a pinch of salt. Both AMDs recent big releases were heavily delayed (Ryzen and Vega). And Intel release far more SKUs per year than AMD do. So what happens when Ryzen 2 releases is anyone’s guess.
Of course it smacks of desperate fanboyism to get so upset on a forum about one corporations chips being slower than another corporations chips in gaming apps to start asserting that the corporation whom you prefer will definitely be better on the next release (scheduled for 2019). Why don’t you put a $1000 dollar bet on Ryzen 2 benchmarks beating its competition at gaming on release? I’m sure a bookie somewhere will happily take your money on that one and even give you good odds!
I'm actually shocked how slow Ryzen is in F1 2017 and Project CARS 2. Both great games that racers will want to pick up.
AMD really do need to work hard on Ryzen's gaming performance if they are to close off all reasons for people to purchase Intel, stuff like that is why consumers will ultimately go to the tried and tested if they have any doubts.
111/92 FPS minimum is slow? Yeah, totally unplayable "(y)"
There's not much AMD can do if game is crappy Intel optimized title that uses old DX11 instead newer DX12 or vulkan.
I STATED RYZEN 2 WILL BE FASTER THAN CURRENT INTEL CHIPS.
Did I say it IS faster? No.
Basically it goes like this:
Current games: less cores with higher GHz is better.
Future games: more cores is better even if they have less GHz.
So 720p does not tell anything about speed in future games. It only tells something about current games in the future. Totally different things. Future games will surely make better use of cores, that's 100% sure. You can argue how long timeframe is "future" but not that it won't happen.
Ryzen was supposed to have Sandy Bridge class IPC (40% better than Excavator) with clock speeds around 3 GHz (because of manufacturing process). I don't know where you read hype that said it will be better than Intel's low core offerings
Many people still think there are no decent upgrade from 5 year old Intel system even when considering Intel's offerings. At least Ryzen is pretty good upgrade when considering I/O options whereas Intel's LGA1151v2 is not.
Ryzen 2 is roadmapped for late 2018, so "somewhere" 2019 is not hard prediction. And it should fit current AM4 boards.
That's good idea, I'll start asking what odds I could get for that bet.
111/92 FPS minimum is slow? Yeah, totally unplayable "(y)"
There's not much AMD can do if game is crappy Intel optimized title that uses old DX11 instead newer DX12 or vulkan.
When will AMD fans realize they will never be the best processor. You can have all the value you want, doesn't mean anything when the Intel still has the CROWN. Being KING is what it's all about. There are plenty of ppl in this world who care about having the best not the best value. Best value are for ppl who cant afford the best. AMD will try hard and come up short, as that's always been there moto for almost 20 yrs. The little engine that couldn't beat Intel. Sure they can FINALLY compete, good for them. Know what that really means, nothing. Intel users/fans will still buy the best, which is Intel, that wont be changing anytime soon.Back in real life where people use 1080p, 2560x1080p, and 2560x1440p Freesync monitors, Excellent AM4 motherboards were 20% off at newegg (only $60 shipped for ASRock's excellent AB350m Pro4) and Ryzen 5 1600 was $169.99, but let's go ahead and do everything we can to pretend intel is still relevant in price/performance.......
Lots of posts noting the gpu limiting.which is what you see at higher resolution.which is what the 720p results are for.480 p results would show more spread though meaningless as well.Steve is it possible an intel bias is creeping into your results?
Take the Overwatch 1440p results . Ryzen 1800X and 1600X score the same average FPS as the 7700K and the 7600K . Both Ryzen chips score higher minimum frame rates than the intels and yet your chart ranks them lower .
Why?
Come to think of it he Ryzen scores higher minimum FPS than even the i7 8700K .
The Z370 being compatible with Canon Lake rumor was started by a fake article which has been since taken down.
Z370 is regarded as a stop gap solution until the Z390 launches around the time Canon Lake. (disclaimer: these 2 pieces of information are taken from "leaks" of slides and other info and should be taken as such)
We don't know yet if Z370 will be compatible with Canon Lake or if Z390 will work with Coffee Lake.
What do Project Cars and F1 2017 have in common?I'm actually shocked how slow Ryzen is in F1 2017 and Project CARS 2. Both great games that racers will want to pick up.
AMD really do need to work hard on Ryzen's gaming performance if they are to close off all reasons for people to purchase Intel, stuff like that is why consumers will ultimately go to the tried and tested if they have any doubts.
Steve is it possible an intel bias is creeping into your results?
Take the Overwatch 1440p results . Ryzen 1800X and 1600X score the same average FPS as the 7700K and the 7600K . Both Ryzen chips score higher minimum frame rates than the intels and yet your chart ranks them lower .
Why?
Come to think of it he Ryzen scores higher minimum FPS than even the i7 8700K .
This test was far from scientific. Why did you use 32MB for the Intel systems and only 16Gb for the Ryzen system. All factors must be identical except for the cpu and motherboard. This is elementary. Toss your results in the garbage.
Despite your comment, I'm sure you're aware that Ryzen still has issues when all DIMMs are populated and as a result can't run at 3200 speeds.
...
I do not like kings I am an egalitarian communist. Kings are b's in this day and age. What a waste using computers exclusively or mostly for gaming. ....
This is to be expected. Four memory modules stresses the memory controller more than two modules, so it's not surprising that the amount of modules also affects the achievable overclocking results. In fact, for several AMD CPUs from FX to Sempron, even the maximum supported _stock_ memory speed has varied depending on the amount of modules used, as well as the amount of available slots and the rank of the modules. For example for the FX line the officially supported speeds are as follows:
2 slots available, 2 populated: 1866 MHz
4 slots available, 2 populated: 1600 MHz
4 slots available, 4 poplutated, single rank memory: 1600 MHz
4 slots available, 4 populated, dual rank memory (or both dual and single rank): 1333 MHz
I don't know if Intel CPUs have been similarly sensitive to the memory configuration, but it's hard to see any point in using 32 GB of memory. The best case scenario is that it has no effect, but the worst case scenario is that it affects the maximum stable OC you can achieve.