EClyde
Posts: 2,404 +950
I am always going to spend less....a few or a dozen frames don't mean diddly
Man, I cant seem to match this performance with my 1600, Im running 3200mhz ram too that is being detected and performing as it should...
Rebranded Celeron? :rolls eyes.
seriously, not sure if steve has a retail or a review chip, in anycase, even as retail ,there will be good ones and not so good ones,
Are you also using the latest Bios? (some motherboards have the 1.0.0.6 AGESA BIOS as a beta update)I guess The only game I have in this review is GTA V and thats one of the poor performers. I can only seem to hit 3.7ghz with my stock cooler with reasonable temps. Im also using intel burn to test temps and stability. Maybe I crank voltage up a bit and bump to 4.0ghz and just game while monitoring temps. You know, a real world overclock, not synthetic .
Are you also using the latest Bios? (some motherboards have the 1.0.0.6 AGESA BIOS as a beta update)
What is the voltage you are using and what is the ambient temperature (where I live things tend to get fairly hot during the summer)? What are the temps of the VRMs? There can be a lot of factors that could limit your OC.
Now if only Vega came as close to nVidia equivalent for almost half the price, like Ryzen has to Intel, I would finally get full AMD build.
Great article etc, but the most mind boggling to me was why you chose i7 vs R5? they are kinda different tier CPU's. Why not i5 vs R5 or i7 vs R7?
Others have hit the nail on the head, wanted a 6-core vs. 6-core comparison, 8-cores are overkill for gaming right now. I don't recommend the 1700 over the 1600 for gaming.
Maybe, but still. It's like comparing Nissan Leaf vs Tesla Model S ... just because they both have 4 wheels. and 6 wheels would be overkill
Good thing you didn't compare them to some 6 core mobile phone. ... because 6 cores.
But yes, you are right. R5 1600 is a very good choice for gamers and budget builders.
you have BIOS and drivers up to date? you have a GTX1080Ti?Man, I cant seem to match this performance with my 1600, Im running 3200mhz ram too that is being detected and performing as it should...
That was the whole point of this article. Lower tier AMD CPU being as good as Intels high end CPU.Great article etc, but the most mind boggling to me was why you chose i7 vs R5? they are kinda different tier CPU's. Why not i5 vs R5 or i7 vs R7?
As is the price. Now if there was a 60FPS limit on most games like there exists speed limits in the USA then both would be very comparable.I'd say the difference between those two cars is still very noticeable without breaking the law, like night and day noticeable
the 1600x is the same thing compared to the 1600. it doesn't get the stock cooler, but it has higher stock clocks. both OC to 4.0GHzSo they use intel 7800X (X) but they only compete against amd 1600 not the 1600X (X) come on guys really it may not be a big upgrade but its still a little faster.
Awesome job Steve. truly showing that Rysen puppy can run with the dogs,not very fair though the Rysen having to run with a stock cooler and a 360.00 dollar custom loop to get the i7 to go flatout.did you try the custom loop on the risen just too see how much further it could go? ,maybe little Rysen can kick some azz,with some decent cooling,just sayin,though I haven't heard of it breaking any records.
Its Still Intel/Nvidia FTW. my 3930 k @ 4.2 gig and gtx 1080 Extreme Gaming, is right there with with your framerates ,World of Tanks I push 120 frms consistently,Maxed, 3 years old now and still no need for an upgrade ,maybe the second 1080 when it prices right, hope they pay you well,take some kit home? the EYES must be bugging out after that much gaming.lol
Man, I cant seem to match this performance with my 1600, Im running 3200mhz ram too that is being detected and performing as it should...
I wouldn't say you are bias, but I get a hint that you personally are using an intel. Not saying that anything is wrong with that. I am myself using an Intel and I used an AMD before that. Usually I switch depending on the price/performance.
Personally about the review I can only say It was extensive. Yes, OC Intel takes the throne on paper. But if you look at the price that is 50 % less for the Ryzen 1600 over 7800X, for an almost same performance while consuming less energy and with a clock almost 1 GHZ in difference per core. I must say Ryzen 1600 is the winner in this case price/perf..
Also I know this was an extensive research of tests done, and you are amazing for doing it. Next time I would ask if possible to give us temps as well. Would mean alot if you use OC in the article.
I guess The only game I have in this review is GTA V and thats one of the poor performers. I can only seem to hit 3.7ghz with my stock cooler with reasonable temps. Im also using intel burn to test temps and stability. Maybe I crank voltage up a bit and bump to 4.0ghz and just game while monitoring temps. You know, a real world overclock, not synthetic .
I'd like to point out a couple things that in my mind really boost the Ryzen chip in this battle.
1) AMD system used half the memory. Same speed but half the amount. Now I am sure none of the systems needed more than 16Gb (hell 8 would do). It is just worth noting.
2) Clock speeds of both Intel chips were way higher than the R5. Almost 1Ghz more for the 7700k. I would be very curious to see the results with the SAME clock speeds. Since the R5 wasn't pushed past 4Ghz yet performed as it did, is it safe to say, if you can clock it higher, the gap between chips gets smaller? At least clock them with the same amount of overclock (IE: 400Mhz increase for the R5, so both Intel chips are increased 400Mhz).
Since you were doing Hex core vs Hex core, the results are pretty damn close. I applaud AMD for the Ryzen and look forward to Threadripper! Will we see a similar test done when those chips drop? I hope so. Thank you for your effort!
I have had a 1600 for a month or so, and so far it hasn't been an awesome experience. Due to the non-stop BIOS bugs... I can't switch my cpu voltage off of auto, so I can't OC past 3.8 right now, memory timing issues, etc... Maybe in six months I'll be glad I went with AMD but right now I wish I would have just bought an i5. Spent more time troubleshooting than playing games.
You certainly sounded like you want Ryzen to win based on your comments. So... biased towards AMD perhaps, a little bit maybe? Hmm?
Good stuff though. Great article. Well, kind of. You should have included higher resolutions.
Some board manufacturers are slightly lagging behind with the bios updates but they are coming for sure. The bios issues were reported since day 1, it's the price you pay for buying a completely new platform. (kinda like when you buy a console day 1 and intel is the same). Do you have 1.0.0.6 AGESA BIOS?I have had a 1600 for a month or so, and so far it hasn't been an awesome experience. Due to the non-stop BIOS bugs... I can't switch my cpu voltage off of auto, so I can't OC past 3.8 right now, memory timing issues, etc... Maybe in six months I'll be glad I went with AMD but right now I wish I would have just bought an i5. Spent more time troubleshooting than playing games.
Compare your performance with a game like Far Cry Primal as I
Things that really help are obviously a clean install on the Ryzen system, if you’ve come from an Intel system previously and just transferred the OS over you will be down 10 – 20% on performance. Make sure Windows 10 is up to date, make sure the AMD system drivers are installed and make sure the AMD power profile is selected in Windows (that one makes a big difference). Ohh and make sure the motherboard BIOS is up to date
You should be able to run 4 GHz with an aggressive fan curve and 1.375 volts of power. My Ryzen rig is running 27/4 at that voltage and frequency.