SFF.Network AMD Ryzen announced, detailed and available for pre-order TODAY !

Ever since AMD first announced the work that would later be branded as Ryzen, the company has been strategically and masterfully orchestrating a narrative of dramatic change and disruption to the staid status quo of consumer and enthusiast-grade processors. Today, however, AMD has built up this performance into a crescendo, by revealing their top-performing Ryzen AM4 CPUs today.

Read more here.

 

[ChainedHope]

Hey, can you cite that? Most of the reviewers I looked at didn't give the 1700 much attention but it's the chip I'm most interested of the R7 line by far.

edit -- I seem to have made an error and thought it was the 1700, but it was infact the 1700x in the first video, but its still a decent benchmarking suite that ran against the 2 chips. Mix of gaming and productivity. You can extrapolate from the numbers how the 1700 would do based on the second one.

The second video is getting some serious flak right now, but its from the less informed people who do not really know what they are talking about. The benchmarking ideology and test cases are a very good comparison of the 1700 and the 7700K.

Spoiler

1700X and 1800X
1700

Also keep an eye on the Level1Techs channel, Wendell is a very knowledgeable guy and I expect some different benchmarking and ideology from him for actually testing productivity performance as compared to all the gaming benchmarks that have been going on. He tweeted me saying that his review will be finished up tomorrow-ish so expect a video on it soon.

 

[MarcParis]

What is amazing is result variation from 1 reviewer to another.. That demonstrates how new (unmature) ryzen platform is.
On productivity, r7 1800x is clearly matching performance from i7 6900k. However in game, it's below significantly 6900k. I'm looking mainly 4k results because i'm planning to use one gtx 1080 ti, most probably. At least in 4k, in'most games, Ryzen is behind intel processors but far less in 1080p...where results are completely missleading.

 

[MarcParis]

Linus was one of the few reviewer with Asus crosshair, and its results on 4K gaming are more explicit :

And Hardware.fr is still the best technical review (as usual..) Here is the link about issue on cache/ram bottleneck
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/956-22/retour-sous-systeme-memoire.html

I'm eager to see reviews of R7 1700 and its OC potential..

 

[3lfk1ng]

I'm eager for the next few months of bios updates and support for up to 3600MHz ram.

Thankfully, until the smaller boards hit the market, I get to sit back and watch it all unfold - for better or for worse.

 

[TheInternal]

I'm thrilled to see the Ryzen review numbers matching up well with leaked numbers. The Ryzen line looks like it won't do anything the BEST compared to offers from intel, but it will do everything WELL at an extremely competitive price point. If I hadn't gotten my 6850k for half off, I'd totally go with the R7 1800X. I'm kinda hoping we'll see price drops across the 2011-v3 platform motherboards <.<

About the only folks that would probably be outright unhappy with the Ryzen would be folks building a rig for 1080p gaming (and nothing else)... though I assume that's a dying breed / the R7 would be outside the price range of that market.

With the low TDP and high thread counts, I'll be curious how much of a darling the R1700 becomes in the SFF space.

 

[MarcParis]

Personnally I'm more interested in R7 1700 benchmarks and OC capabilities. Clearly R7 1800X is not the best deal. R7 1700X and potentially R7 1700 are better deal.

Fingers crossed.

 

[MarcParis]

In this review, using Asrock X370, Ryzen is better...I'm betting on big mess on motherboard bios..

Especially he managed to have only 53°C temperature on AIDA 64...strange where other reviewers could struggle with H110GT...do AMD temperature monitoring failing?..

PS : also make sure High performance mode is activated on windows 10..

 

[K888D]

I know that PassMark benchmark numbers aren't a great indication of gaming or application performance, but I think this table is a good indication of the AMD vs Intel picture:

It depends on what you want to do with your computer as to which is the better choice.

If your all about pure gaming performance then the i7-7700/k is still the best choice, with lower power draw, higher single threaded performance and a lower cost.

If your all about productivity and cutting edge gaming performance is not a priority then the Ryzen is probably the better value choice.

 

[MarcParis]

Well, after comparing intel i7 7700 (non K) vs Ryzen is another discussion.. i7 7700K is clearly far, far better than i7 7700 (4,2GHz vs 3,6Ghz base clock is a tremendous gap).

But you are right, core i7 7700K is the king of gaming cpu (and even some productivity also). choice for my Cerberus-x is far from being done..

 

[MarcParis]

and here it is : R7 1700 (OC @3,9Ghz) vs i7 7700K (OC @5Ghz) in 1080p gaming...and thus Ryzen R7 1700 seems to be the best deal..

 

[K888D]

I suspect though that even the i7-7700 (non K) will outperform Ryzen in allot of gaming tests, and with its 65W TDP and even lower price point than the 7700K version it is a good choice for SFF systems

 

[EdZ]

The other thing I hate about all of these gaming benchmarks is half the time the frame rate difference is not actually going to be perceivable in real life. I don't know about the rest of you, but I can't tell the difference between like 60 FPS and 100 FPS. My eyes are shit, and perhaps that is the problem, but I saw very few benchmarks where the numbers suggested there would be a significant real world difference in the quality of what you're experiencing as an end user. Furthermore I believe that Ryzen did quite well on most tests with minimum frame rate when compared with the 7700K which I personally feel to be a vastly more meaningful number to me.

The better metric to look at is not framerate, but frame delivery time variance. So far I think only PCPerspective have tested using this method.

 

[BirdofPrey]

That's definitely a good idea.
It's sad how many people always seem to try and go for max framerate when the reality is a couple FPS isn't noticeable especially the higher the framerate is (35 vs 30 is more noticeable than 125 vs 120) and any framerate higher than your monitor can output is a waste anyways.

What can be fairly noticeable is huge frame drops, so what's more important is that the framerate is stable and, preferably matches what the display is capable of.

 

[ElinaNguyen]

Here is the benchmark from me
-Hardware used:
Intel:
CPU: Intel Core i7-7700K
Mainboard: ASUS Prime Z270-A
SSD: Samsung SM961 256GB, Samsung 850 EVO 128GB, PNY SSD 480GB.
CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i
PSU: FSP Aurum 700W
RAM: Corsair 2x4GB 2133.

AMD:
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1700X ES
Mainboard: ASUS Crosshair VI Hero
SSD: Samsung SM961 256GB, Samsung 850 EVO 128GB, PNY SSD 480GB.
CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i and AMD Wraith Max
PSU: FSP Aurum 700W
RAM: Corsair 2x4GB 2133.

-Software benchmark:

-Gaming Benchmark:

-OC Benchmark and Power Consumption:

-Conclusion:
- Overclocking RAM difficult.
- AVX2 bad performance.
- Low temperature when running default.

Oh, i fogot temperature:
When i used Corsair H100i, temperatures are hovering around 52-60*C and Wraith Max : 65-70*C (Ambient: 28*C)

 

[Phuncz]

Thanks @ElinaNguyen for your review !

At the moment there is a lot of talk about various factors negatively influencing the results of some benchmarks.
From AMD themselves: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5x4hxu/we_are_amd_creators_of_athlon_radeon_and_other/defa6bu/

In addition to Lisa's comments, there are also some variables that could affect performance:

1) Early motherboard BIOSes were certainly troubled: disabling unrelated features would turn off cores. Setting memory overclocks on some motherboards would disable boost. Some BIOS revisions would plain produce universally suppressed performance.

2) Ryzen benefits from disabling High Precision Event Timers (HPET). The timer resolution of HPET can cause an observer effect that can subtract performance. This is a BIOS option, or a function that can be disabled from the Windows command shell.

3) Ryzen benefits from enabling the High Performance power profile. This overrides core parking. Eventually we will have a driver that allows people to stay on balanced and disable core parking anyways. Gamers have been doing this for a while, too.

These are just some examples of the early growing pains that can be overcome with time.

As well as proper support that needs to happen (in the OS) for the design of the cores and the Core Complex (or CCX):
https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/746710-ryzens-high-cache-latency-probably-explained/

Ryzen's architecture is such that if a thread on one CCX needs to access the cache in the other CCX, it needs to talk through a bus system that goes through the memory controller. The bandwidth of this interconnection is only 22GB/s, about the speed of DDR3-1600. SLOW.

So we're looking at some motherboards needing firmware fixes, some RAM issues that will be updated through microcode, OS support needs to be fixed and developers need to embrace AMD's technology isn't just a copy-paste of Intel's.

Bottom line, Ryzen is a capable processor with different characteristics. Sometimes it will be better than Intel and sometimes it will be worse.

 

[MarcParis]

Thanks for your personal benchmark and also this Review from techreport
From Joker Productions :

• http://www.toptengamer.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-vs-intel-i7-7700k-1800x/
• R7 1800X (3.9Ghz) vs 6800K (4.3Ghz)
• R7 1700 (@3.9Ghz) vs 7700K (5.0Ghz)

Clearly Ryzen 7 could deliver my required level.. Clearly, also it depends on motherboards...and currently I found that aorus AX370 Gaming 5 seems to be the least buggy..

I'll wait for additional review, more bios, windows 10 update...but potential is clearly here...especially R7 1700 @3.9Ghz, that's a very good deal!

 

[Ceros_X]

Here is the benchmark from me
-Hardware used:
Intel:
CPU: Intel Core i7-7700K
Mainboard: ASUS Prime Z270-A
SSD: Samsung SM961 256GB, Samsung 850 EVO 128GB, PNY SSD 480GB.
CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i
PSU: FSP Aurum 700W
RAM: Corsair 2x4GB 2133.

AMD:
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1700X ES
Mainboard: ASUS Crosshair VI Hero
SSD: Samsung SM961 256GB, Samsung 850 EVO 128GB, PNY SSD 480GB.
CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i and AMD Wraith Max
PSU: FSP Aurum 700W
RAM: Corsair 2x4GB 2133.

-Software benchmark:

-Gaming Benchmark:

-OC Benchmark and Power Consumption:

-Conclusion:
- Overclocking RAM difficult.
- AVX2 bad performance.
- Low temperature when running default.

Oh, i fogot temperature:
When i used Corsair H100i, temperatures are hovering around 52-60*C and Wraith Max : 65-70*C (Ambient: 28*C)

Good review. Do you have any higher clocked ram to repeat a few tests on Intel? I feel like Intel would do a lot better with higher clocked memory (there's no reason not to be running 3200mhz or higher as Intel has no issues supporting this IMO). Thanks for sharing!

 

[Kwirek]

It is a well known fact these days that you don't need a beast of a cpu for "gaming performance" - unless the AMD Ryzen R7-series is fatally flawed in some way not yet shown it should be good enough for that. But hand on heart - so is my old 2600k, generally speaking.
Joker appear to bottle-neck the cpu with the gpu - giving a real-world scenario but not actually showing more than that neither processor bottle-neck a GTX1080. Not a great feat when you've cranked up the settings and then resolution.

It will be interesting to see further tests and I'm holding my thumbs, but I'm not expecting miracles. We'll most likely see in the coming months if the core count alone adds anything meaningful to the table except for video editors and the like (which I assume would use a gpu?).
Hopefully the processors wont be as overpriced as the latest AMD graphics cards were (Sweden), and keep that competitive edge...

 

[ElinaNguyen]

Good review. Do you have any higher clocked ram to repeat a few tests on Intel? I feel like Intel would do a lot better with higher clocked memory (there's no reason not to be running 3200mhz or higher as Intel has no issues supporting this IMO). Thanks for sharing!

Yeah sure.

 

[Kmpkt]

Have many of these test been running the Intel systems on 2666 MHz ram as well?