[Techspot] AMD Ryzen 5 1600 vs. Intel Core i7-7800X: 30 Game Battle! [Links Fixed - Updated]

[beginner99]

That's an extremely poor showing for Skylake-X. In Excel the i7-7800X (a six core CPU) uses more power than the i7 6950X (a ten core CPU) and is slower. In CB15 It also uses more power than the i7 6900K (an eight core CPU) and is also slower.

Intel has destroyed efficiency by using thermal paste, adding AVX-512, using a mesh, and changing the cache hierarchy.

I suspect they are also having process issues with these chips. They 7800x being lower clocked than the 7820x and showing high temps and power use. The worst binned parts obviously end up as a 7800x. I would hence avoid that at all cost.

 

[William Gaatjes]

I suspect they are also having process issues with these chips. They 7800x being lower clocked than the 7820x and showing high temps and power use. The worst binned parts obviously end up as a 7800x. I would hence avoid that at all cost.

I was thinking, if the cache changes needs software optimization support for optimal results, then indirectly, ryzen would benefit from future optimization efforts for Intel cpus too since both have large L2 and exclusive (non inclusive) L3 , yes ?

 

[formulav8]

hopefully Krasnich follows

Surprised he hasn't been replaced yet. He's looking like AMD's Hector.

 

[scannall]

Surprised he hasn't been replaced yet. He's looking like AMD's Hector.

I hear Hector is looking for work. Maybe Intel can hire him.

 

[swilli89]

Amazing show for the 1600. I almost should have waited for that instead of getting the 1700, but either one is a very good value with plenty of thread power.

Truly. However even if I was buying today post 1600 release.. I think the 1700 still continues to edge it out in overall value. I find myself doing a bit more video production (as just a hobby) and the 1700 will offer a nice upgrade from the hex core 1600.

 

[PhonakV30]

I can't believe it :

Ryzen@4Ghz matches 7800x@4.7Ghz ?! I thought Skylake-x OC Is Much faster than Ryzen ! Damn

 

[moonbogg]

I can't believe it :

Ryzen@4Ghz matches 7800x@4.7Ghz ?! I thought Skylake-x OC Is Much faster than Ryzen ! Damn

I bought an Athlon 64 FX-57 that was 2.8ghz and was faster than a 3.8ghz P4. Not quite there yet, but getting closer! A couple revisions here, some more thermal paste over there and mission complete? Yeah maybe!

 

[Zucker2k]

well, as far as I know there is no a game using all cores/threads, so stock doesnt mean they are running at its base or all core clocks, but higher than that (due to turbo feature). For example, is very possible 7800X is running game benchs at 4.3-4.5, or 1600X at 3.7-3.8 etc. This is a very likely reason to not seeing a great difference with fixed OCs at 4.7 or 4.0

About productivity, you have 1700 or 1700X. They are cheaper than 7800X too (not to mention the cpu-mobo combo), with a bit better overall perf, stock or oced

Can you provide a link?

 

[Zucker2k]

He has been spending way too much time on twitter pushing SJW narratives and anti-Trump rhetoric, instead of concentrating on his job.

Little wonder Intel has failed to drive home what should be clear advantages.

His removal can only be a good thing for Intel, hopefully Krasnich follows him out the door.

He's been on sabbatical. My guess is, his opinion was overruled, so he chose to spend time concentrating on other interests.

 

[wildhorse2k]

And don`t forget this one after the test..

Who is to blame? Intel? What should prospective customers do according to you?

 

[TheGiant]

I bought an Athlon 64 FX-57 that was 2.8ghz and was faster than a 3.8ghz P4. Not quite there yet, but getting closer! A couple revisions here, some more thermal paste over there and mission complete? Yeah maybe!

Well we are not there. SKL-X has not better gaming perf than ryzen, yet we call it a fail.
With profi workload the 7800X competes with ryzen 8C not 6C. But the direction is there. Intel again focusing on SIMD, high freq - the p4 concept which was terrible

as for the FX57 vs P4- the p4 was a hand calculator comparing to the FX cpus

 

[wildhorse2k]

Well we are not there. SKL-X has not better gaming perf than ryzen, yet we call it a fail.

Current situation allows us to clearly see who is bigoted and who is logical. Its astonishing how many bigoted people live among us. Much more than I thought.

 

[IEC]

Current situation allows us to clearly see who is bigoted and who is logical. Its astonishing how many bigoted people live among us. Much more than I thought.

TheGiant used the word "it", which could refer to either SKL-X or Ryzen. The way the sentence is structured, it is likely (but not 100%) that he is criticizing the fact that certain people labeled Ryzen a failure due to gaming performance issues, while those exact people seemingly gave SKL-X a free pass on gaming performance issues.

Calling other forum members bigots is also uncalled for and wholly inaccurate when using the term to describe valid criticisms of micro architectures.

 

[MarkPost]

Can you provide a link?

Its my experience. I own a 1700X @3.9 and a 7800X @4.5, and did some tests... video encoding (x264, x265, Xvid, Divx) and rendering (3ds max, lightwave, Cinebench, Povray, Maxwell, Blender).

 

[maddie]

TheGiant used the word "it", which could refer to either SKL-X or Ryzen. The way the sentence is structured, it is likely (but not 100%) that he is criticizing the fact that certain people labeled Ryzen a failure due to gaming performance issues, while those exact people seemingly gave SKL-X a free pass on gaming performance issues.

Calling other forum members bigots is also uncalled for and wholly inaccurate when using the term to describe valid criticisms of micro architectures.

You are correct. One can substitute.
SKL-X has not better gaming perf than ryzen, yet we call it a fail.
SKL-X has equal or worse gaming perf than ryzen, yet we call it a fail.

 

[wildhorse2k]

TheGiant used the word "it", which could refer to either SKL-X or Ryzen. The way the sentence is structured, it is likely (but not 100%) that he is criticizing the fact that certain people labeled Ryzen a failure due to gaming performance issues, while those exact people seemingly gave SKL-X a free pass on gaming performance issues.

Calling other forum members bigots is also uncalled for and wholly inaccurate when using the term to describe valid criticisms of micro architectures.

You misunderstood my post. My post refers to both groups who fail to see issues on both sides. I didn't use the words "you ...". My statement wasn't addressed to him.

 

[AtenRa]

How the times have changed, people really expected to see a lot of CPU performance difference at 1080p Ultra settings ??

 

[jihe]

Meh, they should test the 6-core X5650, at $24 and could run registered ecc ram at $5 per 4G stick. Now that is real gaming value.

 

[wilds]

Meh, they should test the 6-core X5650, at $24 and could run registered ecc ram at $5 per 4G stick. Now that is real gaming value.

That would absolutely bottleneck a 1080 ti, especially on a game like PUBG!

 

[lobz]

I can't believe it :

Ryzen@4Ghz matches 7800x@4.7Ghz ?! I thought Skylake-x OC Is Much faster than Ryzen ! Damn

heavy throttling

 

[lobz]

Well we are not there. SKL-X has not better gaming perf than ryzen, yet we call it a fail.
With profi workload the 7800X competes with ryzen 8C not 6C. But the direction is there. Intel again focusing on SIMD, high freq - the p4 concept which was terrible

as for the FX57 vs P4- the p4 was a hand calculator comparing to the FX cpus

we mostly don't call it a fail because of worse gaming performance then their own previous uarch, but because of the massive regression of power efficiency

 

[lobz]

How the times have changed, people really expected to see a lot of CPU performance difference at 1080p Ultra settings ??

it was the most important thing ever, when ryzen launched. try to understand us -> hell, I've even seen some sites do 768p testing......

 

[biostud]

Getting the x99+5820k at launch is probably going to give me my longest running system at some point.

 

[lefenzy]

It's a shame that these benchmarks rarely include widely played esport games like lol, dota, or csgo. CSGO is CPU-bound, and players want the highest FPS possible.

 

[wilds]

It's a shame that these benchmarks rarely include widely played esport games like lol, dota, or csgo. CSGO is CPU-bound, and players want the highest FPS possible.

Agreed. I play a lot of Rainbow Six, and the only way to get a stable 240fps is with a 7700k above 5 GHz and with super fast DDR4. But for CSGO, 240 fps is a lot easier which is really nice. I can see Ryzen and SKY-X hitting 240 for CS (maybe not 100% of the time), but not maintaining a minimum of 240 for rainbow six unfortunately.