Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > CPU's and Motherboards

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #42 (permalink)  
Old March 2, 2017, 03:13 PM
486's Avatar
486 486 is offline
Allstar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 526

My System Specs

Default

Bad news:
Ryzen IPC is lower than Broadwell (around 10%)
Ryzen frequency is higher than Broadwell (around 10%) to get performance parity
Ryzen 128-bit wide AVX2 is weaker than Broadwell 256-bit wide AVX2 (duh!)
Ryzen IMC support is limited at the moment (may or may not be addressed by BIOS updates)
Not a gamer chip

Good news:
Ryzen is 50% cheaper than Broadwell
Ryzen needs no overclock, it is already done
Pretty good high workload chip. As a computer programmer I see it is a great chip for work

Essentially you get Boardwell-E with quirky RAM support and 10% performance penalty but factory overclocked by 10% to compensate... for 50% discount

I will wait for RAM support to improve from MB manufacturers and Intel response. But I do not expect massive discounts on Intel chips, Intel is still a king of the hill.
__________________
486
Fractal Design R5 + Seasonic X-660 650W
Asus X299 TUF Mark 2 + Intel i7-7800X + G.Skill Ripjaws V 3200 8GB x 4
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB + Samsung 850 Pro 512GB + HGST 5400RPM 2TB
Evga GTX 1080 FTW 8GB + BenQ BL3201PH 4K 32"
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old March 2, 2017, 03:24 PM
Dark Knight's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 463
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 486 View Post
Bad news:
Ryzen IPC is lower than Broadwell (around 10%)
Ryzen frequency is higher than Broadwell (around 10%) to get performance parity
Ryzen 128-bit wide AVX2 is weaker than Broadwell 256-bit wide AVX2 (duh!)
Ryzen IMC support is limited at the moment (may or may not be addressed by BIOS updates)
Not a gamer chip

Good news:
Ryzen is 50% cheaper than Broadwell
Ryzen needs no overclock, it is already done
Pretty good high workload chip. As a computer programmer I see it is a great chip for work

Essentially you get Boardwell-E with quirky RAM support and 10% performance penalty but factory overclocked by 10% to compensate... for 50% discount

I will wait for RAM support to improve from MB manufacturers and Intel response. But I do not expect massive discounts on Intel chips, Intel is still a king of the hill.
Gaming performance was already addressed above. Those who are disappointed expected it to be 7700K performance for gaming but Ryzen was never intended to primarily compete against the 7700K especially in gaming. It was always shown against the 6900K primarily. Disabling SMT seems to improve performance (we saw a similar situation with Nehalem and gaming performance hit when it was first released with SMT [aka HT]).

Also those two 128-bit AVX instructions can be joined and used as 1 single 256-bit AVX instruction as well for Ryzen.

As for memory support I am not sure how you can say it won't be addressed by future bios updates. This is a platform in it's infancy. Nehalem also had similar DDR3 issues when it first launched that later as it matured had better DDR3 support and capability. This also supports the bios update bringing better memory support:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comment...other/defe1xq/

SKYMTL would you agree that this is similar to Nehalem's launch with the gaming performance hit with SMT and early DDR3 issues/support? I remember very similar issues when Nehalem launched as a brand-new platform including performance penalties in games with HT on versus HT off.
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old March 2, 2017, 03:37 PM
486's Avatar
486 486 is offline
Allstar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 526

My System Specs

Default

I did not compare R7 to 7700 (Kaby Lake). I compared R7 to 6900 (Broadwell). Upcoming R5 will be compared to 7700.
7700 has massive frequency advantage over both R7 and 6900. 7700 is a gamer chip.

Also, I did not say that RAM support will not be addressed. I said it may or may not be addressed. I personally do not know IMC implementation details on R7 to declare it either way.
__________________
486
Fractal Design R5 + Seasonic X-660 650W
Asus X299 TUF Mark 2 + Intel i7-7800X + G.Skill Ripjaws V 3200 8GB x 4
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB + Samsung 850 Pro 512GB + HGST 5400RPM 2TB
Evga GTX 1080 FTW 8GB + BenQ BL3201PH 4K 32"
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old March 2, 2017, 03:45 PM
Dark Knight's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 463
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 486 View Post
I did not compare R7 to 7700 (Kaby Lake). I compared R7 to 6900 (Broadwell). Upcoming R5 will be compared to 7700.
7700 has massive frequency advantage over both R7 and 6900. 7700 is a gamer chip.

Also, I did not say that RAM support will not be addressed. I said it may or may not be addressed. I personally do not know IMC implementation details on R7 to declare it either way.
You didn't compare it to the 7700K but I said in my post above that there is disappointment because there was overhyping and comparing it towards the 7700K especially for gaming performance. That was never the case when the 1700X/1800X were primarily competing with Haswell-E and Broadwell-E. The R5 1600X will be compared to 6850K and similar Broadwell-E processors and the R3 quad-core(s) with 4c/8t will be compared very likely to the 7700K.
Reply With Quote
  #46 (permalink)  
Old March 2, 2017, 04:00 PM
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 1,555

My System Specs

Default

Oh snap, X370 Prime supports ECC UDIMMs.
__________________
heatware
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old March 2, 2017, 04:21 PM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 13,605
Default

As I said in the review, there's no doubt large and slow 8-core processors are poor for gaming. That's where (hopefully!) Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 will come into the equation. I can imagine a 4.0GHz base clocked Ryzen to go gangbusters in games.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old March 2, 2017, 04:28 PM
Bao Bao is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 402
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
As I said in the review, there's no doubt large and slow 8-core processors are poor for gaming. That's where (hopefully!) Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 will come into the equation. I can imagine a 4.0GHz base clocked Ryzen to go gangbusters in games.
Is this to say, you don't have the R5's and R3's on hand just yet? :P
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old March 2, 2017, 04:35 PM
sweenytodd's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: winterPEG
Posts: 362

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bao View Post
Is this to say, you don't have the R5's and R3's on hand just yet? :P
They are coming out in Q2
Reply With Quote
  #50 (permalink)  
Old March 2, 2017, 04:48 PM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 13,605
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bao View Post
Is this to say, you don't have the R5's and R3's on hand just yet? :P
Q2.

However, with some (not retail) mobo BIOS' you can disable CCX's or individual cores and thus boost speeds. That COULD be a very interesting test......hmmmm.......
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The AMD Ryzen CPU Preview; Zen Matures - Comment Thread SKYMTL CPU's and Motherboards 23 December 27, 2016 08:54 PM
The AMD R9 390X 8GB Performance Review Comment Thread SKYMTL Video Cards 37 July 9, 2015 03:17 PM
NVIDIA GTX 970 SLI Performance Review (Comment Thread) SKYMTL Video Cards 12 November 18, 2014 05:31 PM
Far Cry 2 Hardware Performance Review Comment Thread FiXT Gaming 21 November 30, 2008 09:09 PM