• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Official AMD Ryzen Benchmarks, Reviews, Prices, and Discussion

Page 90 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
13,891
3,435
136
The Gaming Performance

So here is where we need to write an entire paragraph. You have been able to see that the Ryzen 7 1800X performance is good, but not just yet 100% where it needs to be. During the past week we have been going back and forth to figure out what could be causing the relatively lower game performance. To date, we have no valid answer to that. The graphics card runs properly PCI-Express 3.0. We know from the RAW and synthetic performance benchmarks that the cores are fast enough, in fact VERY fast. Somehow that does not relate to game performance. It will be interesting to see if other media / websites will show similar results to ours. It rather feels and smells a little like what Nvidia has been fighting a while ago, a DPC latency issue. Next to that we find Ryzen 7 rather memory bound with fairly high memory latency in the 80 to 100ns+ ranges depending on your configuration. It is what it is though, the performance definitely is good enough for what it needs to be, but currently at 1080P with a fast enough GPU the performance lacks a little compared to where it needs to be and can be. I will need to give AMD the benefit of the doubt here, the platform is young and everything is new. The processor certainly is fast enough compared to the Intel 59xx / 69xx counterparts. We will keep an eye on this and when we have to report anything about it we'll update this content. And also in closing on this topic, if you are a little GPU bound or use 2560x1440, this really is a non-issue as perf there is top notch.
Guru3d:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-processor-review,24.html

tl;dr 1440p and above need not care about 720p/1080p benches. I'm at 4K so I'm GPU-bound anyways.
 

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
13,891
3,435
136
From Tom's Hardware re: gaming performance:
We come away from today's coverage with a number of questions that couldn't be answered in time for the launch. For instance, we discovered Ryzen's tendency to perform better in games with SMT disabled. Could this be a scheduling issue that might be fixed later? AMD did respond to our concerns, reminding us that Ryzen's implementation is unique, meaning most game engines don't use if efficiently yet. Importantly, the company told us that it doesn’t believe the SMT hiccup occurs at the operating system level, so a software fix could fix performance issues in many titles. At least one game developer (Oxide) stepped forward to back those claims. However, you run the risk that other devs don't spend time updating existing titles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: looncraz

Glo.

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2015
4,243
2,282
136
Gamers Nexus reviews shows that turning OFF SMT from Ryzen chips makes the scores better.

The SMT bug is still there. Yesterday JayZTwoCents was rumbling on Twitter about last minute update to BIOS, of MoBos, to improve the performance. Most of reviews may not implement this.

It will be interesting to see what will happen in near future. Will the BIOSes improve the performance of the CPU?

Shintai, stop spreading FUD. There is too many unknowns right now, even if the data is on the table.

Let me give you and example of SMT bug. Accorging to Gamers Nexus review, in Total War: Warhammer, at stock CPU, it averages 127 FPS, with SMT on. At 3.9 GHz with SMT on, it averages 132 FPS.

With SMT OFF, at STOCK, the CPU averages 153 FPS, at 1080p. Something is not right here.
And what is more, with SMT off it is 10 FPS behind 6900K.
 

alexruiz

Platinum Member
Sep 21, 2001
2,568
179
106
Is any of those reviews indicating motherboard used and motherboard firmware version?
The PCPer review doesn't.
I assume all the numbers posted are using older firmware, which would explain the differences in results between sites.
 

PPB

Golden Member
Jul 5, 2013
1,118
168
106
Seems either SMT issues or memory configurations (some reviewers didn't use the latest BIOS) affecting gaming capabilites. Hopefully the former are resolves as you can't really disable SMT in OS, but dont know if setting thread affinity would help here.
 

PPB

Golden Member
Jul 5, 2013
1,118
168
106
lol. I assume shintai will forever believe that the very first benchmarks on a brand new uArch will be all there is ever to say about performance. :D
No, only if results go with his failed narrative. He is not quoting the graphs where Ryzen is making the 6900X or the 7700K look like turds.

Remember him being too scared of high idle power consumption, so that's why he stayed away from HEDT Intel platform. Now he is silent, as AMD's own HEDT is up to 10W lower idle power consumption against the 7700K. And it's doing it a 2200mhz idle clocks.
 

flash-gordon

Member
May 3, 2014
123
34
101
Guru3d:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-processor-review,24.html

tl;dr 1440p and above need not care about 720p/1080p benches. I'm at 4K so I'm GPU-bound anyways.
Guru3D conclusion was good, because it didn't jump to conclusions:

We know from the RAW and synthetic performance benchmarks that the cores are fast enough, in fact VERY fast. Somehow that does not relate to game performance.
It's a new plataform, even performing at the top it has a lot of space for tweaking, just the way I like!
 

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
13,891
3,435
136
lol. I assume shintai will forever believe that the very first benchmarks on a brand new uArch will be all there is ever to say about performance. :D
What's funny is that my 6700K takes a huge hit to FPS streaming with OBS while gaming, but the few reviewers who have tested this with Ryzen note a very minimal drop (1-3 FPS). Ryzen is flat out better for streaming while gaming.

1440p and 4K gaming performance also looks fine.

Of course for 90% of everything else I use my main desktop for, Ryzen is better than my 6700K.

I think I need to order another case so I can bench the R7 1800X I have on the way versus my 6700K system side by side.
 

sm625

Diamond Member
May 6, 2011
8,176
135
106
Gaming performance is crap for the same reason the google octane score is crap. This is why I been ranting for months... "where is the google octane score?" Now we see that it is garbage. Gaming performance is going to be garbage. Nothing changes. i5-7600k vastly and dramatically destroys all of these ryzen SKUs. Intel has no reason to change anything.
 

Burpo

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2013
4,112
311
126
For rendering it's a hit. For gaming not so much..

"All six of the Intel processors scored within a few frames of each other while the Ryzen 7 1800X is at a 23% disadvantage.
once again we see the 1800X suffering a bit in gaming performance. Here the 7700K is 19% faster, as is every Intel CPU but the 7600K.

I’m not sure what to say about these results – I didn’t expect them. But I am hearing other reviewers are seeing very similar results with the same games and other titles as well. It’s possible we are looking at a bug of some kind in the firmware (I’ve heard disabling SMT will improve performance) of it could be a chipset level issue with add-in card performance. We are waiting to hear back from AMD "
 

lolfail9001

Golden Member
Sep 9, 2016
1,056
353
96
Wait, AMD did not even get rid of their temperature scaling formula? That was like the worst thing in AMD CPUs for me since forever.
No, only if results go with his failed narrative. He is not quoting the graphs where Ryzen is making the 6900X or the 7700K look like turds.
There is a single non synthetic test where it happens? Sincerely curious, because i have just come home and from first few i see it only does good in synthetics.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
102,056
16,295
136
Gaming performance is crap for the same reason the google octane score is crap. This is why I been ranting for months... "where is the google octane score?" Now we see that it is garbage. Gaming performance is going to be garbage. Nothing changes. i5-7600k vastly and dramatically destroys all of these ryzen SKUs. Intel has no reason to change anything.
OK.

Let's just quote this one for posterity.
 

Face2Face

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2001
4,101
215
106
So it looks like for the people who purchased the 1800X should be able to get 4.0-4.2GHz at around 1.35-1.4v. Seems like they're clocking better vs. the 1700X. From what I've seem the 1700 makes the 1700X irrelevant if you're an overclocker.
 

lolfail9001

Golden Member
Sep 9, 2016
1,056
353
96
So it looks like for the people who purchased the 1800X should be able to get 4.0-4.2GHz at around 1.35-1.4v. Seems like they're clocking better vs. the 1700X. From what I've seem the 1700 makes the 1700X irrelevant if you're an overclocker.
From oc club review they are not binned at all, both 1800X and 1700X are irrelevant for overclocker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Space Tyrant

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
13,891
3,435
136
So it looks like for the people who purchased the 1800X should be able to get 4.0-4.2GHz at around 1.35-1.4v. Seems like they're clocking better vs. the 1700X. From what I've seem the 1700 makes the 1700X irrelevant if you're an overclocker.
Sure looks like it. Making me happy about springing for the 1800X versus the 1700/X, though it looks like the real winner in terms of perf/$ is the 1700. 8 cores of goodness OC-able to 3.8GHz +/- for $329.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Face2Face

clemsyn

Senior member
Aug 21, 2005
406
9
81
Bummer... I was hoping to upgrade my Xeon 775 (modded) for gaming with Ryzen. Oh, well, its good I waited. To Microcenter I go with Intel 7700k!!!
 

PPB

Golden Member
Jul 5, 2013
1,118
168
106
Wait, AMD did not even get rid of their temperature scaling formula? That was like the worst thing in AMD CPUs for me since forever.

There is a single non synthetic test where it happens? Sincerely curious, because i have just come home and from first few i see it only does good in synthetics.
You think Corona renderer is a synthetic app for example? There are various test that are not synthetic and Ryzen looks good.

Lol at the dude saying i5 destroys this cpu for gaming, we know there is a SMT issue at play, and even then it performs as good if not better than 7600K. Seriously people, trying to drown this thread with FUD.
 

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
13,891
3,435
136
From oc club review they are not binned at all, both 1800X and 1700X are irrelevant for overclocker.
TechSpot had a different experience:
My 1800X did not run stable at 4.2GHz using 1.45v. The highest clock I could achieve was 4.1GHz and I was able to leave the voltage on auto, which saw the motherboard boosting it to around 1.35v when under load.

The 1700X didn't make 4.1GHz but I was able to get it up to 3.95GHz. Speaking with Bryan from Tech City, he also found 3.95GHz to be the limit for his 1700X chip and he spent quite a bit more time than I did trying to push it further, so this is the likely end of the road when air-cooling.
http://www.techspot.com/review/1345-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x/page5.html
 

Justinbaileyman

Golden Member
Aug 17, 2013
1,904
227
106
OC wall seems to be 4-4.1Ghz depending on chip. Another overclockers dream. And when you cant be creative with the bigger L2 you are down to SB IPC.

http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x-and-1700-processor-review_191753/

OMG I hope these benchies are fake or from ES Chips or old bios cause even the i3 7350k is beating the 1800x :(
Unfortunately its to late fr I already ordered the 1800x and its in transit since last night.
On top of it no motherboard to pair with my CPU yet and no Cooling solution.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY