• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

My time with Ryzen

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Alaric

New Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Location
Satan's Colon, US
Yeahhhh, I think I want something better than a couple floor jacks holding up my FWD when I drop the trans out of it. Just sayin'. Yikes.

edit: Just saw the half of a cinder block-oriented in the weakest way possible. I think I'd rather watch that fiasco unfold than be part of it. :eek:
 

trents

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2008
So it seems from what little bit of data we have so far that with Ryzen AMD has made significant strides in reducing power consumption, IMC strength and cache resource sharing among the cores. The performance of the CPU seems more in line with the number of cores it sports than was the case with Vishera. So at the same frequency dollar for dollar Ryzen is at least competitive and maybe superior to Intel now in well multi-threaded apps. However, the per core performance is still behind that of Intel and this is reflected in lower gaming scores. What we need now is some reporting on the effect on overclocking potential of Ryzen with water cooled systems as the comparisons we have so far between Intel and Ryzen reflects the lower end of the overclocking range at least for Intel. If Skylake will go to 5 ghz and Ryzen will only go 4.4 that changes the story line.
 

Kenrou

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Since most people don't need to OC Skylake/Kaby Lake beyond 4.5ghz (most games do perfectly well at stock 4ghz/4.2ghz if you have a decent GPU) to get über FPS, Ryzen hitting 4.4ghz-4.5ghz on a 4c/8t or 6c/12t is decent enough for half the price no ?
 

Alaric

New Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Location
Satan's Colon, US
If they hit those speeds. So far that hasn't been the case. Having said that, newer, multi threaded games and DX 12 seem to run just fine with Ryzen.
 

Kenrou

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Assumed that up to a certain point the less cores the more MHz, not expecting 4c/8t or 6c/12t to crap out at 4ghz :(
 

trents

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2008
Yeahhhh, I think I want something better than a couple floor jacks holding up my FWD when I drop the trans out of it. Just sayin'. Yikes.

edit: Just saw the half of a cinder block-oriented in the weakest way possible. I think I'd rather watch that fiasco unfold than be part of it. :eek:

I like the creative use of the plastic kiddie chairs to hold up the transaxle
 

trents

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2008
My concern for the lower core count CPUs: Look at that stock clocks and boost clocks. Nothing clocks higher than the 1800x.

That's just it. Most of the data we have at present is connected to the high core count Ryzens. And yeah, they may be around half the price of their Xeon couterparts but the argument is less valid when you moved down the Ryzen core model ladder for people who don't need work station CPUs but just want good gaming since you no longer have a superior workstation CPU which also is good at gaming.
 

Alaric

New Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Location
Satan's Colon, US
Unless you need the Ryzen's performance in other, multi threaded areas and the gaming performance is a happy addition to its capabilities. I probably wouldn't buy the 8c/16t just for gaming at present. Then again, I didn't buy a 4c/4t for gaming either. If buying a 4c chip today (or six months ago. LOL) I would get a 4c/8t. And did.
 

wingman99

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
It takes years for game to be developed, I'm not holding my breath to have Ryzen utilize games better than i5 7600k.
 

wingman99

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Games can be patched.

It takes ground up coding, called a patch for game performance improvements. BF1 is a example of a game with DX12 patch that runs better on DX11. I'm not holding my breath on AMDs x86 architecture running better than i5 6600k with different game coding.