• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Official AMD Ryzen Benchmarks, Reviews, Prices, and Discussion

Page 224 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Ajay said:
Scheduler fix???
Click to expand...

"The March 27th Bretonnia update helps the underlying game engine better understand the topology of Ryzen with respect to the number of logical vs. physical cores."

This game had a large gain with SMT disabled so the most likely issue was that it was seeing Ryzen as 16 cores/16 threads not 8 cores/16 threads.
I've called it a scheduler fix but maybe there is a better name for it like "core count fix".
We know that at least Ghost Recon Wildlands and F1 2016 have similar issues,hopefully those get a fix too.

getgraphimg.php
 
Last edited:
zinfamous said:
yeah, buyer's remorse tends to be a big part of it in my experience. Jumping on Intel prior to Zen release probably stings. I know that when I do things, I just stay away from tech forums for at least 2-3 years, so as to remain blissfully ignorant of my terrible decisions.
Click to expand...
It's a good thing you didn't buy that 6950x then 😳
coercitiv said:
Ideally we keep it here. Rest assured though, there will be at least 3x R3 threads and 5x R5 threads after the official launch, which hopefully will wither and... fade 🙂
Click to expand...
What about the R9 😀
 
zinfamous said:
yeah, buyer's remorse tends to be a big part of it in my experience. Jumping on Intel prior to Zen release probably stings. I know that when I do things, I just stay away from tech forums for at least 2-3 years, so as to remain blissfully ignorant of my terrible decisions.
Click to expand...
That's part of buying fast changing technology. Next gen will always be faster or cheaper. Do what I do, buy top of the line stuff in one go, enjoy the flagship performance for one year then know the parts will last 5 years or more. After that repeat the cycle. I don't usually bother upgrading in between. It's pointless and water of money. I would just buy a brand new PC every cycle since the PSU and solid state drive would be deteroting pretty badly then.
 
inf64 said:
Ryzen 1800X vs 7700K (quicksync included) vs 6900K gaming + streaming performance analysis:



Ryzen wins
Click to expand...

what a coup. AMD seems to have been extremely smart with this strategy, because the real force behind the $$$Billions and growing gaming industry is e-sports, fueled by Twitch and youtube users, and all of them getting younger and younger. Far more than absolute gaming performance, you need to target:

--live streaming gamers needing peak performance in real-life situations (running multiple programs, + games, + streaming at once, all the time)
--MT performance for all of the editing and rendering that these very same users perform, as part of their little business.
--oh hey--Price! Let's win in all of these use cases, with ONE CHIP, and make it affordable for younguns and their (re: parents') budgets!

Considering that this is the bulk of what is driving the gaming industry now and going forward, AMD currently has the only chip worth considering, full stop. And there is a lineup of chips to meet all needs and budgets. Methinks that 1600X is going to be the carpet-bombing campaign that pulverizes the rubble left by the R7 line's thermonuclear first strike. Yeah, maybe that's hyperbole, but at this point I don't think it is. IIRC, Intel is basically stuck on this architecture for then next 3 or even 4 years? This is not good for them. Intel is extremely diversified, though, so they have the resources to finally spend and innovate for once (e.g: the last 8 years) in response to this butt-kicking.

now....all that matters is for AMD to market properly. You need to convince those kids (but more importantly: their lazy parents) that AMD is the absolute best option. It is, and the gamers will know it, but you end up with: "Sounds great Jr, but I'm older than you and been around for a while, and I can tell you: Intel is the best!"
 
The problem is AMD's marketing is the worst. When they have a chance to hit the bullseye, they concentrate on what's behind it and miss the target entirely.
 
R0H1T said:
It's a good thing you didn't buy that 6950x then 😳
Click to expand...

lol! not a chance with my cheap-o self. But I did buy a Xeon 1231v3 a little over 2 years ago which, I think, was a decent target and time to upgrade from my Phenom II 965 BE (960? I forget).

I'm honestly not sure if a 1600X this year will be worth the upgrade for me, but it looks like it will. More real cores, more threads, more ghz! for roughly the same cost seems better. I also have a cheap-o MB (by design) that keeps my Xeon at 3.4, 3.2? ghz, so it's not like I wouldn't notice a real difference.

....But I need to wait some time for the mATX/ITX boards to come out, stable, before I do that kind of upgrade. Likely dump my money first on the proper Vega and display upgrade (Xeon should be more than adequate for those needs), then go Full Monty on the Ryzen project. I can wait.

(I just bought a house, so currently hemorrhaging money on real needs makes a big toy upgrade like this seem really, really, really dumb right now. 😀)
 
zinfamous said:
what a coup. AMD seems to have been extremely smart with this strategy, because the real force behind the $$$Billions and growing gaming industry is e-sports, fueled by Twitch and youtube users, and all of them getting younger and younger. Far more than absolute gaming performance, you need to target:

--live streaming gamers needing peak performance in real-life situations (running multiple programs, + games, + streaming at once, all the time)
--MT performance for all of the editing and rendering that these very same users perform, as part of their little business.
--oh hey--Price! Let's win in all of these use cases, with ONE CHIP, and make it affordable for younguns and their (re: parents') budgets!
Click to expand...

I think it's good that AMD can claim to be the performance king or the clear best choice for this part of the market, but I don't think it's exactly important.

Yes, a lot of people watch eSports and streamers these days, but how many actually stream themselves. I don't think that capacity is going to drive a lot of sales. Brand association might though, as if a favorite streamer is using a product, it might result in more sales of R5 chips, just like I'm sure NVidia gets a lot of 1060 sales because the Titan or *80 Ti that many streamers use is currently king.

The real coup is going to be their APUs. We already know that a Zen CCX is reasonably competitive with Intel and that AMD's graphics are far above and beyond what Intel can offer, so an APU with 512 Vega shaders and 4 Zen cores is going to be an exceptional value for the average eSport game (DoTA, CS, LoL, etc.) player.

If AMD can get some chips like that in a midsize notebook, I think that they can lock up the college / back-to-school market. Even if Intel manages to make sizable performance gains again, which is a pretty large ask without an architecture overhaul, I don't think they can create enough of a CPU edge to compensate for their GPU disadvantage.
 
zinfamous said:
now....all that matters is for AMD to market properly. You need to convince those kids (but more importantly: their lazy parents) that AMD is the absolute best option. It is, and the gamers will know it, but you end up with: "Sounds great Jr, but I'm older than you and been around for a while, and I can tell you: Intel is the best!"
Click to expand...
Sounds a lot like US politics & mama (or Papa?) Trump 😱

In the end though the Ryzen brand & class/price leading performance should result in bringing in lots of $ but (good) word of mouth always helps. AMD should thank lots of dads on these boards for their current & future sales!
 
Mopetar said:
I think it's good that AMD can claim to be the performance king or the clear best choice for this part of the market, but I don't think it's exactly important.

Yes, a lot of people watch eSports and streamers these days, but how many actually stream themselves. I don't think that capacity is going to drive a lot of sales. Brand association might though, as if a favorite streamer is using a product, it might result in more sales of R5 chips, just like I'm sure NVidia gets a lot of 1060 sales because the Titan or *80 Ti that many streamers use is currently king.

The real coup is going to be their APUs. We already know that a Zen CCX is reasonably competitive with Intel and that AMD's graphics are far above and beyond what Intel can offer, so an APU with 512 Vega shaders and 4 Zen cores is going to be an exceptional value for the average eSport game (DoTA, CS, LoL, etc.) player.

If AMD can get some chips like that in a midsize notebook, I think that they can lock up the college / back-to-school market. Even if Intel manages to make sizable performance gains again, which is a pretty large ask without an architecture overhaul, I don't think they can create enough of a CPU edge to compensate for their GPU disadvantage.
Click to expand...

yup yup, good points. I know I don't stream and I rarely, if ever, watch them. So it's not like they are targeting those scenarios for me. But if those streamers with their own advertising meat adopt this, the only chip that is now relevant to their needs, then this is what they will be advertising to their fans. Heck, AMD only needs to send out some freebies to the whales in this realm in return for an AMD logo at the bottom of their stream, or at the beginning of their splash screens.
 
Now that some more time has passed, has anyone got 32GB in either 2X16 or 4X8 running at 3000Mhz or higher with good timings? Or is memory support still a major issue for the higher GB configurations? I need at least 32GB for Photoshop, and would prefer to leave the upgrade path open to 64GB by going 2X16.

The only Flare-X kits I see for sale in Canada are either 16GB or way too slow.
 
ManyThreads said:
Now that some more time has passed, has anyone got 32GB in either 2X16 or 4X8 running at 3000Mhz or higher with good timings? Or is memory support still a major issue for the higher GB configurations? I need at least 32GB for Photoshop, and would prefer to leave the upgrade path open to 64GB by going 2X16.

The only Flare-X kits I see for sale in Canada are either 16GB or way too slow.
Click to expand...


3200MHz CL14 with 4x8GB or 3200 CL16 with 2x16GB done already.
Very good thread to follow at XS forums 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top