Official AMD Ryzen Benchmarks, Reviews, Prices, and Discussion

[Insert_Nickname]

Got to share this as it's an ignored issue, single rank vs dual rank tests

It is not exactly news though. AMDs memory controllers have always liked dual rank DIMMs. I'm not surprised at those results.

 

[mattiasnyc]

Well, if they buy an R7-1800X instead of a 6900K, they can use the extra 600-700 dollars on faster storage.

That'll result in a greater boost to their productivity than any marginal PCIe effects.

I don't really agree with that. You need storage that is fast enough to not be a bottleneck. Some bottlenecks you can live with, others not. I think it's arguable that if your machine allows you to use X number of effects with two GPUs, but only with fast storage, and without fast storage you get no streaming capability at all at the required media resolution, then the storage throughput becomes an irrelevant factor because it's a requirement. In other words it needs to be fast, period, and so the spending is there, period. You'll buy fast storage regardless of whether you're working on a Ryzen or an i7.

 

[imported_jjj]

It is not exactly news though. AMDs memory controllers have always liked dual rank DIMMs. I'm not surprised at those results.

Check the HardwareFR link, they also take a quick look at the 6900k.

 

[w3rd]

When you consider the extra hardware (NVMe/PCIeSSD drives etc) that you can afford to use with an R7 vs. a 6900K, then its a non contest.

Correct^
But some will suggest money doesn't matter... and that people are incapable of choosing Ryzen, because they bleed blue. There is no contest and by the end of the year, more people will own 6 & 8 core Ryzen CPUs, than own 6 & 8 core Intel CPUs.

Them the facts.

 

[Atari2600]

In other words it needs to be fast, period, and so the spending is there, period. You'll buy fast storage regardless of whether you're working on a Ryzen or an i7.

In which case you'll buy more than 1 machine. So better cost/performance still works for R7.

 

[zinfamous]

I don't really agree with that. You need storage that is fast enough to not be a bottleneck. Some bottlenecks you can live with, others not. I think it's arguable that if your machine allows you to use X number of effects with two GPUs, but only with fast storage, and without fast storage you get no streaming capability at all at the required media resolution, then the storage throughput becomes an irrelevant factor because it's a requirement. In other words it needs to be fast, period, and so the spending is there, period. You'll buy fast storage regardless of whether you're working on a Ryzen or an i7.

you're really going out of your way to try and justify paying 2x the price for nearly identical performance....OK, so let's say you put that savings somewhere else? How about fancier plugins for Avid or Premiere? Well, you're going to say that you will be purchasing those anyway...

OK, so why should no pros actually care about saving $500? What is the reason? And these are drop-in upgrades over the next 2 or 3 years, maybe longer.

Intel will require a new socket and new Mobo, insane expense to upgrade that 6900 going forward, perhaps multiple times. The staggering expense for relatively no performance advantage when committing to Intel for 4 more years is really quite shocking.

 

[mattiasnyc]

In which case you'll buy more than 1 machine. So better cost/performance still works for R7.

I don't think you understand how it works. Either that or I don't.

If I'm color correcting 4k footage with multiple nodes in Resolve then I won't be using multiple machines, I'll use one. Because the data rate is high I'll need fast storage regardless of the effects processing. Thus, fast storage is a must, one computer is the norm, and GPUs determine processing capacity.... and GPUs rely on lane-count....

 

[mattiasnyc]

you're really going out of your way to try and justify paying 2x the price for nearly identical performance....OK, so let's say you put that savings somewhere else? How about fancier plugins for Avid or Premiere? Well, you're going to say that you will be purchasing those anyway...

OK, so why should no pros actually care about saving $500? What is the reason?

Because time is money. If you're transcoding content on the fly or offline and you're saving 10 hrs per month you'll have made back those $500 in no time. It's not even a consideration for the high end users.

And 'no', it's not "nearly identical" in some cases, and in the cases where that matters... well, then it matters. It doesn't matter what you or I think about that, what matters is if this group of content producers need the performance or not. I say they do.

You can even look at it this way: Suppose we tier CPUs in absolute maximum performance, just for the sake of argument, and the list goes something like this;

6950
6900
1800x

Now, cut out the 1800x, meaning you go back in time 4 months.... Did Intel sell 6950 CPUs? So, how does the 1800x change things for the people that buy the 6950?

And again: People keep ignoring the lane count. It's not irrelevant. It doesn't matter if your CPU performs at 80% of the top Intel CPU for 50% of the cost if you need lanes that the Ryzen doesn't provide. A requirement is a requirement.

 

[sm625]

The people I'm talking about creating content aren't going to benchmark using Grand Theft Auto at 1080.

And these people you are talking about dont believe in showing actual data to back up their assertions? Where is the data that shows how badly 4X or 8X PCIe is penalized?

 

[IEC]

My workstation's scratch disk:

I'm sure there are some specific use cases where paying extra for a top-end Intel HEDT processor would be worth it, but I'm quite happy with my CPU and IO throughput on Ryzen.

P.S. AMD's Zeppelin-based HEDT platform is coming 2H this year. 12c/24t and 16c/32t with more PCI-e lanes (40+).

 

[w3rd]

I don't think you understand how it works. Either that or I don't.

If I'm color correcting 4k footage with multiple nodes in Resolve then I won't be using multiple machines, I'll use one. Because the data rate is high I'll need fast storage regardless of the effects processing. Thus, fast storage is a must, one computer is the norm, and GPUs determine processing capacity.... and GPUs rely on lane-count....

Then if you were building a new rig today, 1800x would be a great platform for you. Why wouldn't it?

With the added savings, your needs you would be able to build a system of your own requirements, for $500 less. Because you now have more funds to build out your system, for YOUR usage & performance (ie: buying a 1Tb NVMe instead of the 512GB one, etc.)

Obviously, if you are talking about a $5k rig, & rendering with multi-gpus, etc. Then understand, in no way is that an average build, or usage scenario. What does PCIe lanes have to do with anything. I am confused. Unless again you are talking about tri-sli/xfire..? Or FirePro stuff..?

Why would an average home user dump that kind of money into an Intel HEDT platform, that is going EOL soon..? When AM4 is just released..?

 

[Atari2600]

If I'm color correcting 4k footage with multiple nodes in Resolve then I won't be using multiple machines, I'll use one.

Is it an interactive process or one that is sent off into a code?

Since it should be sent to code, then having more machines = more productivity.

Anyone serious about such endeavours should be continuously developing their own code for corrections - otherwise as you say - they are doing it wrong and only think they are professional content creators.

 

[Rifter]

I don't really agree with that. You need storage that is fast enough to not be a bottleneck. Some bottlenecks you can live with, others not. I think it's arguable that if your machine allows you to use X number of effects with two GPUs, but only with fast storage, and without fast storage you get no streaming capability at all at the required media resolution, then the storage throughput becomes an irrelevant factor because it's a requirement. In other words it needs to be fast, period, and so the spending is there, period. You'll buy fast storage regardless of whether you're working on a Ryzen or an i7.

I wasnt sure you were trolling untill this post. Now im sure.

Obviously if money doesnt matter and you have an unlimited budget and cost is of no consequence then sure a top end intel HEDT is the best option, most PCIe lanes and most cores(at least untill the new HEDT AMD chips launches).

But for the 99.999999999999% of customers who do not have a unlimited budget Ryzen offers the same performance for WAY less money.

The cost difference of R7 to 6950X is just too hard to ignore, the price perf is so far in AMD's favor that you had to go to the cost is no object intel is best argument just proves the point that AMD is offering way more for the money than intel.

 

[CatMerc]

How I bring an i5 6600K to its knees:

Play game in borderless windowed, attempt to browse web. Watch it struggle.

 

[coffeemonster]

Has this been poseted yet?

 

[tamz_msc]

People keep ignoring the lane count. It's not irrelevant. It doesn't matter if your CPU performs at 80% of the top Intel CPU for 50% of the cost if you need lanes that the Ryzen doesn't provide. A requirement is a requirement.

If it's the number of PCI-E lanes that bother you the most, then just wait for Naples to release in H2.

 

[FalcUK]

I don't think you understand how it works. Either that or I don't.

If I'm color correcting 4k footage with multiple nodes in Resolve then I won't be using multiple machines, I'll use one. Because the data rate is high I'll need fast storage regardless of the effects processing. Thus, fast storage is a must, one computer is the norm, and GPUs determine processing capacity.... and GPUs rely on lane-count....

Hi i don't post that often but i have been reading all of your posts and the thing that really comes to mind is, the cost saving of buying a RyZen Vs a 6900k platform can be put towards Radeons new Professional GPU with the SSD bolted onto it no? Thus negating the need for tons of PCIE lanes etc, removing any storage bottlenecks and what not.

If I'm correct these cards are aimed at this and similar types of work?

Every argument you have has been basically countered and you have consistently moved the goal posts so i am intrigued to see how you move the goalposts with my comment.

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Has this been poseted yet?

They do a blind test, and find that ryzen does feel more smooth, though the differences seem small.

 

[mattiasnyc]

Then if you were building a new rig today, 1800x would be a great platform for you. Why wouldn't it?

With the added savings, your needs you would be able to build a system of your own requirements, for $500 less. Because you now have more funds to build out your system, for YOUR usage & performance (ie: buying a 1Tb NVMe instead of the 512GB one, etc.)

Obviously, if you are talking about a $5k rig, & rendering with multi-gpus, etc. Then understand, in no way is that an average build, or usage scenario.[/quote]

I never said it's an average build or usage scenario. Again we're just back to discussing just what HEDT means. But if Intel's top-of-the-line CPUs / platform is HEDT, and people use it, then by definition it is neither "obsolete" nor "dead", and that doesn't really depend on whether it's 50% users or 1%. It's exactly the same as saying that Ferrari is dead because the vast majority aren't buying them.

What does PCIe lanes have to do with anything. I am confused. Unless again you are talking about tri-sli/xfire..? Or FirePro stuff..?

I think I explained that fairly clearly.

Why would an average home user dump that kind of money into an Intel HEDT platform, that is going EOL soon..? When AM4 is just released..?

I never said an average home user would do that. You're confusing what you think I said with what I actually said. If "average user" and average "usage scenario" is what HEDT is, then the term HEDT doesn't really mean much except "not the low end".

 

[mattiasnyc]

Is it an interactive process or one that is sent off into a code?

Since it should be sent to code, then having more machines = more productivity.

Anyone serious about such endeavours should be continuously developing their own code for corrections - otherwise as you say - they are doing it wrong and only think they are professional content creators.

You clearly have no idea what I'm talking about if you're suggesting users write their own code for this.

And these people you are talking about dont believe in showing actual data to back up their assertions? Where is the data that shows how badly 4X or 8X PCIe is penalized?

Did I write that x8 PCIe negatively penalizes performance? I don't think I did. You tell me.

 

[mattiasnyc]

I wasnt sure you were trolling untill this post. Now im sure.

Obviously if money doesnt matter and you have an unlimited budget and cost is of no consequence then sure a top end intel HEDT is the best option, most PCIe lanes and most cores(at least untill the new HEDT AMD chips launches).

Ok, so we can both agree then that Intel's HEDT isn't dead or obsolete, right? Because that's really all I was saying. Other people jumping on that because they seem to want Intel to 'die' doesn't change that fact.

But for the 99.999999999999% of customers who do not have a unlimited budget Ryzen offers the same performance for WAY less money.

I never disputed that Ryzen offers better performance per dollar for a very large amount of users. To imply that that's what I suggested is nonsense.

The cost difference of R7 to 6950X is just too hard to ignore, the price perf is so far in AMD's favor that you had to go to the cost is no object intel is best argument just proves the point that AMD is offering way more for the money than intel.

Again, never disputed that AMD doesn't offer better performance per dollar for a huge amount of users. Didn't dispute that at all. I was just saying that there are still users out there who need something that AMD currently doesn't offer, and that keeps the Intel CPUs from being dead and obsolete.

I'm not really sure how you guys go from such a simple statement to reading all this other nonsense into it.

 

[Atari2600]

You clearly have no idea what I'm talking about if you're suggesting users write their own code for this.

Professionals do write their own code that hooks into commercial software like Resolve for this.

Certainly professionals that actually might be sensitive to the impact of PCIe lanes.

 

[imported_jjj]

Last week it was the AVX2 guy, this week the HEDT guy and the thread gets hijacked for 3-4 pages just because 1 guy can't let it go and 10 others are feeding him.

 

[Mr Evil]

It's not dead, it's pining for the fjords.

 

[Atari2600]

Last week it was the AVX2 guy, this week the HEDT guy and the thread gets hijacked for 3-4 pages just because 1 guy can't let it go and 10 others are feeding him.

As long as its not juan guy in particular...