CPU/Mobo AMD Ryzen CPUs launched

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let me try to get some rendering benchmarks on my setup - in the mean time check out my earlier post with CPU-z bench comparison against Intel's 8c/16t CPU and also this screenshot comparing against the 7700k... the perf is almost double at slightly less price! Yes, hindered by clock speeds, but IPC is pretty damn good. For some reason (probably OS and/or BIOS) the single core speed stayed at 3.0 ghz and multithreaded went to 3.15 ghz - nowhere near the rated auto turbo speed of 3.7 ghz. I have Windows 10 set to "Balanced" power mode and changing to "High Perf" doesn't help - maybe it has something to do with my mobo BIOS temperature showing 50 C idle perhaps it's hitting 70 C during the bench. Hopefully this is just a BIOS issue/fix and not because I screwed up installation of the stock cooler. On the other side of things my idle clock speed itself does not go below 1.5 ghz so something is definitely wonky.

cpuz-bench-win10v1607-7700k.jpg
 
Last edited:
Emrebel said:
Well, obviously I have seen benchmarks but just wanted to confirm with someone on forums. Ps I am not looking for ultra performance in games, but more into rendering where Ryzen has provided with Blender results.
Click to expand...

Like you said, the CPU shines in CPU oriented benchmarks like Blender and ray tracing such as C-Ray shown on the phoronix.com website.
 
Maya2009 said:
But let's not jump to the conclusion where AMD sucks in gaming?
Click to expand...

Yep, I would still suggest folks wait for 2-3 months for things to settle down with Ryzen to be able to make an informed choice between Intel vs. AMD. It looks like this SMT thing is a gimmick just like Hyperthreading even if they improve it with BIOS/OS/app code fixes. I'm sure more interesting hype to come with the R5 release too :D
 
Some detailed gaming benchmarks (1080p and 1440p).

Looks like 7700K can give anywhere from 10% to 30% .FPS gain over the 1800X.

 
Last edited:
Update on observed clock speeds and temperatures with the 1700 on ASUS B350 mobo with stock cooler - probably still some BIOS/OS/software updates needed here as well:

I've been running CPUz benchmark (single and multi and stress) and was initially disappointed that in Win10 task manager and Ryzen Master app the clock speeds were bit low, meaning Win10 showed 3.0 ghz for single thread and 3.15 ghz for multi/stress (which is odd that single thread speed does not turbo more than multi) and Ryzen Master showed 3.2 for both.

The 1700 is supposed to be rated at 3.0 ghz with max auto turbo "up to" 3.7 ghz I believe. This is without manual overclocking. Some OC people are lucky to get up to 3.9 or little more with high end mobo and coolers it seems.

But the latest CPUz version 1.78.3 which supposedly adds support for Ryzen shows the expected clocks at 3.75 ghz for single thread and 3.2 ghz for multithread/stress test while the tests are in progress.

From the reference/comparison numbers in CPUz bench results - comparing to a 7700k (and assuming IPC is reasonable close to skylake/kablylake levels) it looks like the CPUz clock numbers can be trusted. Also reran with HWiNFO64 during these and it also shows the expected clocks.

Temperatures also look very good (according to HWiNFO64) around 35 C during idle and 55 C in load - BIOS reading in HWINFO is about 4 C higher and when I boot into the BIOS setup screen it shows 55 C which I initially thought was idle speed and concerned me a bit but looks like the HWiNFO64 software can be trusted more (I guess).
 
To add, the idle clocks seem to hover around 1.35 to 1.55 ghz and don't go below that. It's probably OK but I would have liked if it went all the way down to, say, 800 mhz like my previous skylake i5-6500 seemed to do.
 
Lord Nemesis said:
Looks like 7700K can give anywhere from 10% to 30% .FPS gain over the 1800X.
Click to expand...

Personally, I tend to agree more with the video reviewer's (Tech Deals) comments I earlier linked. Something like even though AMD is marketing/positioning the R7 againt i7 - from a technical/specs/clocks/IPC standpoint it's more reasonable to compare to either the i5 (I have the 6500) or the 8 core / 16 thread 6900k.

In this scenario my R7 1700 beats my i5 6500 giving double performance at about 50% more price. Or comparing to the 6900k it gives a bit better performance at one-third the price!

IMHO, when you are getting FPS in the range of 100+ a difference of 10-30% is just a number to look at. One's gaming experience probably doesn't change much (except looking at the displayed FPS number on screen) and comparing to 7700k yes its more FPS today but the scenario can change soon enough with games/vulkan/dx12 taking better advantage of the R7's double core/thread counts at about the same price as a 7700k.

I'm willing to bet people buying 7700k and a high end GPU (say the 1080) right now will regret it in a year's time if/when they want to do 4K/UHD gaming at high FPS and didn't go with Ryzen7 plus, say an upcoming high end Vega GPU :D
 
For "pure single core" perf, I guess yes, even the older skylake i5 6500 will match (or a little ahead of) the 1700 mainly due to better clocks. Running single core tests probably only good for getting a sense of the IPC levels. I guess reviewers have already conlcuded that Ryzen7 IPC is at Broadwell levels?

Probably the upcoming Ryzen5 series (4c/8t) can clock better to compete with i7 7700k even though AMD is marketing/positioning it against i5.
 
vishalrao said:
've been running CPUz benchmark (single and multi and stress) and was initially disappointed that in Win10 task manager and Ryzen Master app the clock speeds were bit low, meaning Win10 showed 3.0 ghz for single thread and 3.15 ghz for multi/stress (which is odd that single thread speed does not turbo more than multi) and Ryzen Master showed 3.2 for both.
Click to expand...

It's a known BUG on Windows Win8 and upwards , the bug is RTC Bias timer in which adjusting the reference clock at run-time will affect the Windows timer, causing certain or most applications / benchmarks to perceive time slower (or faster) than it really is.Timer is skewed when changing REFCLK in Windows 8+ , Additionally the default Systimer has issues with OS ratio changes unless HPET is enabled.So if you are not gaming then enable HPET ALWAYS.....
Following OS are effected - W8/8+/10 ( 32/64Bit ), Windows 7 is not effected.

R7 series was billed as to compete with Intel i7 6/8/10 HEDT chips like 68xx/69xx series which it has done brilliantly.I bet those 68xx/69xx are not faring well in games either if compared to mainstream quadcore's....
R5 series will be direct competitor of i5/7 quadcore's.
 
Let the Ryzen R series get optimised for Win10. Until don't make assumptions.
The 2nd Win10 is in April.

Along with optimisation for Ryzen R7 series, Microsoft is updating Gaming Mode and some other changes.

All can be found in the changelog.
 
Dang, my system started hanging/rebooting all of a sudden since yesterday evening (end of day 2 of the build) - tried looking around - memtest, checkdisk, system file scan "sfc /scannow" command etc but all looked OK.

I've had my BIOS settings to non-OC, power saving option enabled, and AMD Core Perf Boost enabled - the clocks used to approach 3.7 ghz for single threaded bench and 3.2 ghz for multithreaded. Was worried it might be due to power fluctuations and my el cheapo PSU - ordered Antec VP550P bronze tier-3, but got Corsair vs550 "white" tier-4 class PSU which everyone here says to avoid. On tomshardware it's listed as "tier 4" but not as bad as the lower tier "avoid at all costs".

But then went into the BIOS and played around with some settings. Disabled energy saving option, disabled Core Perf Boost option and enabled "OC Tuner" option which locked my CPU to 3.2 ghz - now weirdly running CPUz stress for a long time and system was OK. But with previous settings "auto turbo"/core perf boost it would hang/reboot when running stress at same clocks.

CPU and mobo temperatures looked OK to me (fans seem to be still locked in place and running fine) so left it at that. This morning back to checking things out and noticed no matter what BIOS settings I use (including previous ones I had made a day or two ago) and the CPU no longer boosts to 3.7 ghz, max it reaches is 3.2 ghz. No manual OC (clock/voltage) settings ever tried - I don't dare.

Time to start scouring the web if any other folks with this mobo are facing such issues.

Will think about replacing with a better PSU like the Seasonic S12II-620 if any BIOS (ASUS Prime B350 Plus mobo) updates don't resolve things in a few weeks. Hope this is not some permanent hardware damage.
 
Buddy,
Wait for Asus to resolve and release an update.

Even there is a lot of difference between engineering samples & mass produced chips like you right!

The engineering samples give much better results..

All such hiccups are due to hardware & software incompatibility as such.

It eventually takes some time to get everything sorted out right!

Don't jump to conclusions just like that eh...
 
Intel i7 7700k has no competition and Ryzen 1800X/1700X/1700 is trailing far behind in gaming at both 1080P & 1440P.

I don't want to assume anything about R5 or the Ryzen 2/Intel cannonlake :) AMD is back but yet to beat Intel's line up fair & Square ,will it ever beat or want to redeem as Budget king is a big ?

@vishalrao - Thanks for the updates. Keep 'em coming.
 
Darth Vader said:
Intel i7 7700k has no competition and Ryzen 1800X/1700X/1700 is trailing far behind in gaming at both 1080P & 1440P.

I don't want to assume anything about R5 or the Ryzen 2/Intel cannonlake :) AMD is back but yet to beat Intel's line up fair & Square ,will it ever beat or want to redeem as Budget king is a big ?

@vishalrao - Thanks for the updates. Keep 'em coming.
Click to expand...

This chip isnt all about gaming, if you are only into gaming by even an i5 will suffice.
 
Last edited:
First indications of a Ryzen bug? See http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=167605

The guy suggesting/experiencing hangs/crash when running FMA3 instructions stress test. Reminds you of Skylake bug with same instruction set which disabling hyperthreading resolved and they later resolved with a BIOS/microcode update (I guess disabled those instructions altogether).

I wiped my disk clean and installed Win10 Insider Preview (Creator's Update) - interestingly my CPU clocks again are now able to turbo to 3.7 ghz for single core and 3.2 ghz for multithreads.

But the hangs/crashes returned usually while running benchmarks but occasionally while not doing much (just browsing). Looking at the HWBOT.org thread the guy seems to indicate hang when his test reaches "FMA3" instructions.

I downloaded latest Prime95 and indeed it easily crashes (hang or reboot) my system sometimes with multithreaded stress test but very quickly with single thread stress test.

Though I can't figure out or confirm if it has anything to do with instruction set bug - I tried Prime95 settings to disable AVX, FMA3 and FMA4 and also pick older CPU (Core2) architecture code (to avoid these new instructions) but it still hangs my system.

Sadly my mobo BIOS does not support disabling SMT (hyperthreading) to check that aspect.

Something to keep an eye on...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jasku
Jasku said:
This chip isnt all about gaming, if you are only into gaming by even an i5 will suffice.
Click to expand...
That's my point. This chip isn't good for gaming and anyone wants the best CPU for games/single-threaded perf, should go for i7-7700k and not i5.Ryzen.
Reviews shows i7-7700k does perform better than i5-7600k in all new games.

Also no one really knows how R5 is going to perform and AMD is positioning it against i5 and NOT i7.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom