Official AMD Ryzen Benchmarks, Reviews, Prices, and Discussion

Page 185 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
IllogicalGlory

IllogicalGlory

Senior member
Mar 8, 2013
934
346
136
lolfail9001 said:
What are you willing to bet on that? Not to mention that they go against G4560, not against i3s.
Click to expand...
Different market segments. It only competes against that insofar as a good upgrade in performance for a similar uptick in price. AMD has no competitor for the G4560.

It competes with a G4560 the same way i5s "competed" with i3s in Haswell/Skylake era.
 
A

Agent-47

Senior member
Jan 17, 2017
290
249
76
lolfail9001 said:
Did I?
Click to expand...
Yes, and if it performs like $60 G4560 in games why should i buy Ryzen 5 for games instead of G4560?.
Click to expand...

↑
And r3, the 4c4t are going up against i3. So yes. They will be better for the money.
Click to expand...
What are you willing to bet on that? Not to mention that they go against G4560, not against i3s.
Click to expand...

my god you are such a tool. has kellyanne conway been inspiring you?

Im done here :)
 
Last edited:
L

lolfail9001

Golden Member
Sep 9, 2016
1,056
353
96
Agent-47 said:
my god you are such a tool. has kellyanne conway been inspiring you?
Click to expand...
Do you know what conditional is? Ah, right you don't, i am done with you too.

Anyways, i am feeling extra smug now, so thanks The Stilt for explaining to me that Zen was great uarch a fair bit before reviews

gNCf1Ow.png

Those are GB4 scores normalized for 1Ghz (and Naples ES result as is, because as The Stilt has correctly pointed out back then, it was running at 1Ghz).
Blue bar is the best linux OCd result in their data base.
Yellow bar is Naples ES result as it was, credit to PCPer for saving it for me.
Red bar is my i5-6400 for IPC comparison sake. Do note that trying to average those out makes no sense, because it varies from Ryzen being 2.5x faster to Skylake being 2x faster (Gaussian blur/Face detection and SGEMM respectively).
 
L

lolfail9001

Golden Member
Sep 9, 2016
1,056
353
96
IllogicalGlory said:
Different market segments. It only competes against that insofar as a good upgrade in performance for a similar uptick in price. AMD has no competitor for the G4560.
Click to expand...
Not really different since G4560 replaces any market for i3s now, so AMD's pricing strategy of trying to offer better/much much better MT performance for the price kind of falls apart in that tier.
 
cytg111

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,174
12,833
136
lolfail9001 said:
...
By the way, semiaccurate's article [the non-paywalled part, nobody is going to pay $100 for semi-inaccurate news, let alone $1000] directly contradicts your hypothesis ....
Raven Ridge DOES NOT scale to 4W.
Click to expand...

For declining values of DOES NOT as you yourself state; nobody is going to pay $100 for semi-inaccurate news
Seriously though, why are you trying so hard? Is it of that great importance to be right on the interwebs?
 
  • Like
Reactions: richierich1212, PotatoWithEarsOnSide and Glo.
L

lolfail9001

Golden Member
Sep 9, 2016
1,056
353
96
cytg111 said:
Seriously though, why are you trying so hard? Is it of that great importance to be right on the interwebs?
Click to expand...
It is, because it increases chances someone who knows jack will share some actual knowledge. That's a learning algorithm, if you will.
cytg111 said:
For declining values of DOES NOT as you yourself state; nobody is going to pay $100 for semi-inaccurate news
Click to expand...
Not that i cite semiaccurate for my bold claim of Raven Ridge not scaling to 4W, i cite AMD's own roadmap that slaps Stoney Ridge into 2018 line-up. There is only 1 way to explain it from position of common sense: they won't have any other product to fill the niche. And my common sense generally works, see graph above.
 
I

innociv

Member
Jun 7, 2011
54
20
76
tamz_msc said:
The 1400 and 1500X are too closely priced for what they offer - AMD should have priced the 1400 at ~130 and it would have killed off the i3s once and for all.

They are probably going to do that with Raven Ridge I supppose.
Click to expand...
Or rather, they should have just disabled the SMT on the 1400 and increased the frequency and sold them as a higher clock 4c/4t for less and had the 1500X the only 4 core with SMT.

I'm really disappointed that the 1500X isn't 3.6/4.0ghz though... 3.5/3.7 is pretty low.

I'm guessing many CPUs that are worse quality than the 1700, yet have all 8 working cores, are getting half of them disabled to be made into a 1400 or 1500X and that's why the frequencies are so poor.

But anyway, I'm sure the reason there is only $20 difference is because the 1400 will come with a cooler that's worth $20 or so.
edit: Woops. Nope it looks like the 1400, 1500X, and 1600 all come with coolers.
 
Last edited:
M

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
7,831
5,980
136
If the R3 and R5 chips are anything like the R7 chips, then the base clocks don't matter if you're going to OC. Sure the 1800X can make it to 4.1 GHz while the 1700 typically tops out at 3.9 GHz, but at ~$200 difference in price, the 1700 is a better value. Unless the low-end R3 chips are utterly terrible (which is possible seeing that they're all at least the same 65W as the 1700, but who knows what they actually draw) they'll probably all clock at least as well as the 1700.

I think AMD doesn't want to disable SMT because they've got an edge over Intel with their implementation. I'm guessing that the number of naturally defective chips where SMT doesn't work on either CCX is so low that those are just being tossed because there aren't enough chips to have a product category and there's no point in artificially gimping functional parts that can be sold at a higher cost, where they're probably guaranteed to sell as Intel hasn't cut prices yet. The R5 chips are going to stack up quite well against the i5 chips given they're capable of three times as many threads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PotatoWithEarsOnSide, french toast and prtskg
I

innociv

Member
Jun 7, 2011
54
20
76
There is a significant difference in heat when you get to 3.9Ghz on 1.3v versus 1.4v...

And SMT is going to be disabled on R3 chips, I'm sure. Those just don't come out until H2 of this year.

Karnak said:
1500X = $189, 3.5/3.7, 4C/8T. With XFR up to 3.9GHz.
i5-7400 = $195, 3.0/3.5, 4C/4T.

Don't see a problem there. Cheaper, higher clock speeds, more threads. i5's are dead in 4 weeks.
Click to expand...
Sure. I'd have happily paid more than $195 if it was 3.6/4.0 stock with SMT, though.
I just wanted a 4c/8t with decent clocks that's not the ridiculous 7700k $350 price.

Having to OC sucks because it makes them way less power efficient. Roughly doubles the idle power drain.
 
B

beginner99

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2009
5,210
1,580
136
Glo. said:
We know that HBM2 is supposedly expensive, right? Maybe AMD decided to go all out on APU, and make one gigantic design to fit alongside the Ryzen 7 CPUs, in the same line, with similar naming scheme? For example Ryzen 7 1800G 8C/16T+22/24 CU design+ 4 GB of HBM2 with 512 GB/s, and price it accordingly, at 499$?
Click to expand...

How would that fit in the same AM4 socket? It would not. That alone tells you that this won't happen.
 
I

imported_jjj

Senior member
Feb 14, 2009
660
430
136
So the 1400 is low clocks and just 50MHz XFR that is not listed in specs to begin with.
Just a couple of posts above,someone fails to notice the 200MHz XFR boost for the 1500X. AMD has turned XFR into a disadvantage as it is a hidden clock boost that some potential customers fail to notice.

AMD is shooting itself in the foot with the quads.They need to adjust the specs and pricing before launch.
2+2 config does offer 16MB L3$, the impact of that is worth investigating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Agent-47
F

french toast

Senior member
Feb 22, 2017
988
825
136
imported_jjj said:
So the 1400 is low clocks and just 50MHz XFR that is not listed in specs to begin with.
Just a couple of posts above,someone fails to notice the 200MHz XFR boost for the 1500X. AMD has turned XFR into a disadvantage as it is a hidden clock boost that some potential customers fail to notice.

AMD is shooting itself in the foot with the quads.They need to adjust the specs and pricing before launch.
2+2 config does offer 16MB L3$, the impact of that is worth investigating.
Click to expand...
Hopefully consumers will follow reviews, which will include xfr into benchmarks
 
F

french toast

Senior member
Feb 22, 2017
988
825
136
IllogicalGlory

IllogicalGlory

Senior member
Mar 8, 2013
934
346
136
lolfail9001 said:
Not really different since G4560 replaces any market for i3s now, so AMD's pricing strategy of trying to offer better/much much better MT performance for the price kind of falls apart in that tier.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't. Intel offers an i3 at Pentium prices, AMD offers ~ an i5 at i3 prices. Seems pretty clear cut to me. Hence it's almost exactly the same as i3s vs i5s, just at different absolute price.

The G4560 fits perfectly in the CPU stack with Ryzen, occupying its own segment. Likely AMD will offer their own 2/4 SKU in that range with Raven Ridge.
 
AtenRa

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,001
3,357
136
french toast said:
Right so in some cases amd is offering 3x the threads, higher clocks, twice the cache,free decent cooler and charging less! Yet some people are still complaining, jeez what the hell have amd got to do to get a fair shake?
Click to expand...

If its not 50% faster at half the price it ain't worth it :rolleyes:

Im sure reviews will compare the R5 1600 ($219 with cooler) to a 5GHz Core i5 7600K ($239 without a cooler) and then people will roam the net and proclaim Ryzen is a fail for gaming.
But if you compare the R5 1600 ($219 with cooler) OC to 4GHz against the Core i5 7500 at 3.5GHz base and 3.8GHz turbo ($205 with Cooler), they will say its unfair because RYZEN is more expensive and its OverClocked and it uses more energy and and and.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek, sushukka, guachi and 11 others
K

krumme

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2009
5,952
1,585
136
coercitiv said:
R5 1400 3.2-3.4Ghz $169
i5 7400 3.0-3.5Ghz $182
Click to expand...
The 1400 will kill the 7400 in bf1.
About time we get a cheaper cpu that can run that game acceptable at 60fps min.
Some of the new maps gives the cpu a more serious beating than even amiens played in operations mode.
 
  • Like
Reactions: french toast
R

Rngwn

Member
Dec 17, 2015
143
24
36
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5zob94/microsoft_is_now_blocking_windows_7_and_windows/
When you try to scan or download updates through Windows Update, you receive the following error message:

Unsupported Hardware

Your PC uses a processor that isn’t supported on this version of Windows and you won’t receive updates. Additionally, you may see an error message on the Windows Update window that resembles the following: Windows could not search for new updates An error occurred while checking for new updates for your computer. Error(s) found: Code 80240037 Windows Update encountered an unknown error.

Cause

This error occurs because new processor generations require the latest Windows version for support. For example, Windows 10 is the only Windows version that is supported on the following processor generations:

  • Intel seventh (7th)-generation processors
  • AMD “Bristol Ridge”
  • Qualcomm “8996"
Because of how this support policy is implemented, Windows 8.1 and Windows 7 devices that have a seventh generation or a later generation processor may no longer be able to scan or download updates through Windows Update or Microsoft Update.

Resolution

We recommend that you upgrade Windows 8.1-based and Window 7-based computers to Windows 10 if those computers have a processor that is from any of the following generations:

  • Intel seventh (7th)-generation "Intel Core" processor or a later generation
  • AMD seventh (7th)-generation (“Bristol Ridge") processor or a later generation
  • Qualcomm “8996" processor or a later generation
I understand how Windows 7 would not be updated going forward, but Windows 8? Really?? It has standard support from Microsoft until January 2018.

I don't know about anyone else here, but I love Windows 8.1 with Classic Shell. It has everything I need out of a Windows OS, however when it comes to Windows 10 it just feels wrong in some way to me.

Personally I'm still going to be running Windows 8.1 even when I get my Ryzen rig. Thanks Microsoft for another XP-era!

Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

Now M$ won't let you update Win7 with ryzen/kabylake. Really? Microsoft... Really? This is getting too far.
 
tamz_msc

tamz_msc

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2017
3,770
3,590
136
Rngwn said:
Now M$ won't let you update Win7 with ryzen/kabylake. Really? Microsoft... Really? This is getting too far.
Click to expand...
That's not surprising. After all, they made it pretty clear with Kaby Lake. Windows 7 was hurting performance anyway, according to looncraz.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom