FEATURED AMD Ryzen official review list

wingman99 said:

I'm waiting to see how the Chips overclock from retail stores, you never know if AMD did Binning for the review sites.

Click to expand...

I can tell you, without a doubt, my sample was NOT binned.

wingman99 said:

I'm waiting to see how the Chips overclock from retail stores, you never know if AMD did Binning for the review sites.

Click to expand...

I doubt they did: the 1800X runs up to 4GHz on one core. The way the R7 OC on all cores is just so close to a safety net... And out of the 23 reviews I checked, they were all checking between 4 and 4.15GHz.

I would bet that next steppings and optimized microcodes will help getting better results. Time will tell, but IMO, AMD did a great job.

Lads, looking for 1700/1700X reviews, and I could find only one, apart from the ones posted yesterday...

It seems that the 1700/1700x OC the same as the 1800X, in the 4GHz/4.1GHz range, which means that until further revision, save your money, get a R7 1700, OC it to 4/401GHz and call it a day!

Hope I'll find some more tonight, will post if so!

Edit: found a few more, inclding Linux benchmarks

If you take into consideration that this was done on a 14nm and not a 20nm process. AMD has publicly stated that their decision to release the Phanom I (first true monolithic 4c design) on a 65nm process, was a failure. It was not until they moved to a 45nm process, that the Phanom II was able to shine. By that time, Intel had already regrouped/rearmed with a new batch of processors.

Ryzen - The Tech Press Loses The Plot
AdoredTV

Audioaficionado said:

Ryzen - The Tech Press Loses The Plot
AdoredTV

Click to expand...

I may borrow that video for the "other Ryzen thread".

Well, I am not native English speaker, but this guy accent hurts my ears way too much! I had to shut down the video after 2 minutes, lol!

If someone, will be kind enough to summarise for me...

The basic premise seems to be that testing Ryzen at low resolutions with top tier cards is stupid and completely misses the point. When resolutions go up to 1440p and above (which is where you'd expect the cards they used for testing to be anyway) Ryzen hangs right there with Intel's best. A gaming benchmark with a Titan X Pascal at 720p and 1080p just isn't realistic. That, and game optimization will make huge strides as well. He actually showed some interesting figures for an FX 8370 when high end cards were paired with higher resolutions. Seems the octo core Bulldozers are still effective gaming chips. The low resolution scores showed big differences, but as resolution went up so did Ryzen's scores until it was on par with Intel's 7700k, beating it in at least one benchmark. He also pointed out that the end difference in some of the low res tests were the difference between 170+ fps and 130 fps. Hardly a figure that makes Ryzen "bad" for gaming. LOL Essentially, if you're building a rig with gaming in mind for the next few years Ryzen is a better choice than a 7700k. Just don't use your Pascal Titan X with a 1080p monitor. LOL

I wish I had a GTX 1080ti for 1080p 144Hz monitor. I play fast moving FPS games.

wingman99 said:

I wish I had a GTX 1080ti for 1080p 144Hz monitor. I play fast moving FPS games.

Click to expand...

You can buy one soon...