Ryzen 1800x for a Gaming CPU

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

epsilon84

Senior member
Aug 29, 2010
932
105
136
#26
Ib is not good for 4.5
I would say 4 or 4.2 same as bwe. More like 4.0 As ryzen is a 3.9 chip.
A ryzen is not "a few percent better ipc" than ib. Its at aprox hsw/bwe level. Ipc is hard to come buy let not call it few.

Anyway i would only consider 8700 non x for 144. And that upgrade would be less than what a good game patch could give. 25% on a good day. A bit meh imo.

Buy some other gear instead and wait for zen2/cl 8c in a year/year half would be my advice. Its not worthwhile now.
Ivy Bridge was most certainly good for 4.5GHz:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/5771/the-intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-review/4


Please show me a screenshot of an air or even water cooled Ryzen running anywhere NEAR 4.6GHz. You won't. Ivy Bridge has a higher overclock ceiling than Ryzen. Therefore the OPs 4930K, should he decide to overclock it, would most likely match or exceed the performance levels of a 1600X @ 4GHz. Thats where my sidegrade comment came from.
 
Last edited:

IRobot23

Senior member
Jul 3, 2017
600
18
76
#27
GN has really bad Ryzen configuration with ddr4 latencies.

You are stating it as intel Bias guy. Coffee lake does have few % higher IPC than ivy bridge, not worth upgrading...

Again, check out video about ddr4 speed and OC. Lets say that OC represents higher IPC and yet faster DRAM can take out that advantage.

Yes you stated IPC advantage or disadvantage, but I can tell you that bandwidth and latency are very important factor.

DF shows i7 haswell and ivy in Aots as bandwidth limited scoring around 35fps, while skylake scores around 44fps.
 
Last edited:
Aug 11, 2008
10,457
67
126
#28
Sure.
1. Agners blog
- http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=838

2. CS:GO
-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j62iV_tETO8&t=743s
@22:20

3. DDR4 bandwidth
.
- I can post some of my benchmarks, but you will probably not going to take it as "real", so here it goes from digital foundry.

Before you start watching : Higher clock speed could be a factor of higher IPC, oK?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Er_Fuz54U0Y

Here I found out why Crysis is the only game where FX scaled well from 4C to 8C.

PS: IPC depends on a workload, people who is talking about IPC advantage should note that.
A blog, a you tube video, and your own "personal observations". You are right. I dont consider any of them reliable testing sites.
And BTW, you still seem to be confused, or for some reason deliberately mis-interpreting, ipc. Clockspeed has no effect on ipc. Clockspeed affects SINGLE THREAD PERFORMANCE (a combintion of ipc and clockspeed). It does not affect ipc.
 

epsilon84

Senior member
Aug 29, 2010
932
105
136
#29
GN has really bad Ryzen configuration with ddr4 latencies.

You are stating it as intel Bias guy. Coffee lake does have few % higher IPC than ivy bridge, not worth upgrading...

Again, check out video about ddr4 speed and OC. Lets say that OC represents higher IPC and yet faster DRAM can take out that advantage.

Yes you stated IPC advantage or disadvantage, but I can tell you that bandwidth and latency are very important factor.

DF shows i7 haswell and ivy in Aots as bandwidth limited scoring around 35fps, while skylake scores around 44fps.
How is Gamers Nexus configuration bad? So now even DDR4-3466 isn't enough for Ryzen and you have to complain about latencies? Seriously? Can you not see the big gains between the Ryzen 3.9GHz with DDR 2933 compared to 3466? That right there is a tuned Ryzen setup. GN specifically ran with DDR4-3466 for the very purpose of showing how Ryzen scales with faster memory, but apparently even that isn't enough for you...

The bottom line is that a 4930K will perform roughly the same as a 1600X in games, at worst it will be a few % slower as I said due to the lower IPC, but its not worth upgrading the platform for a negligible gain in performance, which was my whole point in the first place. To be perfectly honest even a 8700K wouldn't be a huge jump over a 4930K, Yes, it will have about 15% higher IPC, and a bit more overclocking headroom, but even then, thats around 20 - 25% better peformance at best.
 
Last edited:

IRobot23

Senior member
Jul 3, 2017
600
18
76
#30
A blog, a you tube video, and your own "personal observations". You are right. I dont consider any of them reliable testing sites.
And BTW, you still seem to be confused, or for some reason deliberately mis-interpreting, ipc. Clockspeed has no effect on ipc. Clockspeed affects SINGLE THREAD PERFORMANCE (a combintion of ipc and clockspeed). It does not affect ipc.
Well I understand IPC. I guess you do not understand me. Product A with 3GHz or produst B with 3,9GHz can interpreting as... look you can OC sandy bridge to get skylake ST performance, but in gaming it wont help it much since you would be bandwidth limited.

Digital foundry is not a good source? I guess you are right.
 
Last edited:

IRobot23

Senior member
Jul 3, 2017
600
18
76
#31
How is Gamers Nexus configuration bad? So now even DDR4-3466 isn't enough for Ryzen and you have to complain about latencies? Seriously? Can you not see the big gains between the Ryzen 3.9GHz with DDR 2933 compared to 3466? That right there is a tuned Ryzen setup. GN specifically ran with DDR4-3466 for the very purpose of showing how Ryzen scales with faster memory, but apparently even that isn't enough for you...

The bottom line is that a 4930K will perform roughly the same as a 1600X in games, at worst it will be a few % slower as I said due to the lower IPC, but its not worth upgrading the platform for a negligible gain in performance, which was my whole point in the first place. To be perfectly honest even a 8700K wouldn't be a huge jump over a 4930K, Yes, it will have about 15% higher IPC, and a bit more overclocking headroom, but even then, thats around 20 - 25% better peformance at best.
I never said that. GN has problems with Ryzen setup since it scores really bad in AotS. I cAN post my own benchmark, but currently I have only 8GB of DDR4 in this system.
 
Last edited:
Aug 17, 2013
1,770
13
106
#32
An r7 1800x is going to be an upgrade from a x79 i7 4930k. I went from a intel xeon e5-2650v1 to e5-2680v1 to r7 1800x and it was a night and day difference.Not sure why everyone is saying r7 1800x is not a gaming cpu.Gaming was one of the best things it did while I had it.Personally though if I were you I would consider possibly going with a r7 1700 non "X" and overclock it ever so slighty to say 3.6-3.8Ghz to save $100 bucks and put it towards a better GPU.
 

PhonakV30

Senior member
Oct 26, 2009
942
15
136
#33
An r7 1800x is going to be an upgrade from a x79 i7 4930k. I went from a intel xeon e5-2650v1 to e5-2680v1 to r7 1800x and it was a night and day difference.Not sure why everyone is saying r7 1800x is not a gaming cpu.Gaming was one of the best things it did while I had it.Personally though if I were you I would consider possibly going with a r7 1700 non "X" and overclock it ever so slighty to say 3.6-3.8Ghz to save $100 bucks and put it towards a better GPU.
That Xeon with an 8 cores? What was highest clock that you got it with OC?

Edit : I checked , I think numbers are low ?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1320107/intel-xeon-e5-2680-and-gigabyte-x79s-up5-server-level-performance
 
Aug 17, 2013
1,770
13
106
#34
Not sure 100% on this but I think I had it set to 3.0Ghz and it would boost up to like 3.6Ghz or 3.7Ghz turbo?
I know not the best but it did its job well at the time.Clock for clock though the Ryzen completely mops the floor with my old e5-2680.
 

Topweasel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2000
4,768
363
136
#35
An r7 1800x is going to be an upgrade from a x79 i7 4930k. I went from a intel xeon e5-2650v1 to e5-2680v1 to r7 1800x and it was a night and day difference.Not sure why everyone is saying r7 1800x is not a gaming cpu.Gaming was one of the best things it did while I had it.Personally though if I were you I would consider possibly going with a r7 1700 non "X" and overclock it ever so slighty to say 3.6-3.8Ghz to save $100 bucks and put it towards a better GPU.
Well on top of that you will always have a ton of people that represent one of the smallest niches in high refresh gaming, but outside that most people run with a GPU to some level which becomes the equalizer and an 8 core CPU will let you keep higher mins which is more important. Specially if you treat your computer as something more than a console.
 

ZGR

Golden Member
Oct 26, 2012
1,815
37
106
#37
Neither. Save your money.

OC the i7-4930k and you will be fine for a couple more years of gaming.
It really all depends on what OP plays I guess. But I do agree in general!
 

Insomniator

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2002
6,258
6
106
#38
Overclock your current chip and save $500+

The last thing I would do in your situation is move to an 1800x for gaming.
 

Gikaseixas

Platinum Member
Jul 1, 2004
2,813
9
106
#39
i7 8600K if you have to buy now or wait to see how the new Ryzen chips perform in a few months compared to Intel
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,457
67
126
#41
An r7 1800x is going to be an upgrade from a x79 i7 4930k. I went from a intel xeon e5-2650v1 to e5-2680v1 to r7 1800x and it was a night and day difference.Not sure why everyone is saying r7 1800x is not a gaming cpu.Gaming was one of the best things it did while I had it.Personally though if I were you I would consider possibly going with a r7 1700 non "X" and overclock it ever so slighty to say 3.6-3.8Ghz to save $100 bucks and put it towards a better GPU.
So did you have those xeons overclocked? The stock clocks for the 2680 is only 2.7 ghz base, and max turbo 3.5 (even lower for 2650). Not sure what all core turbo is, but probably only around 3.0 ghz or slightly above. Of course a 4ghz ryzen will be an upgrade over that. So will the op's 4930k (stock 3.4/3.9), especially if overclocked to 4.0 or above on all cores. All you gain with Ryzen over the 4930k is 2 more cores (not much boost for gaming going from 6 to 8) and maybe 10 to at most 15% IPC. (Even less than that if the OP is able to overclock to 4.2 ghz or so.) As another poster accurately said, a sidegrade.

Edit: I stand by what I said about the difference in cpus being minimal. However, ram speed (fast DDR4 for a newer platform vs DDR3 for Ivy E) could make a difference I suppose, but I still highly doubt it would be a significant upgrade. I also dont think an 8700k would be a worthwhile upgrade over an overclocked 4930k, unless the chip is a complete dud and wont reach 4 ghz all core.
 
Last edited:
Aug 17, 2013
1,770
13
106
#42
Nope those Xeons dont overclock at all that I know of and that is why I upgraded to something that does..
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS