AMD Ryzen Quad-Core 2+2 versus 4+0 Core Setups Analyzed

Agent-A01

2017-03-27 16:34

So the poor gaming performance is due to another issue. Maybe a game engine with 'proper' optimization will bring some improvements, if not poor game performance will continue on until Ryzen 2.

#5412962

Toss3

2017-03-27 16:46

Would be nice to know what is causing the bad performance in games if it isn't the CCX interconnect. AMD should get on this asap (or maybe they know it cannot be solved and are thus staying quite).

#5412967

Dygaza

2017-03-27 16:53

So the poor gaming performance is due to another issue. Maybe a game engine with 'proper' optimization will bring some improvements, if not poor game performance will continue on until Ryzen 2.

Dunno what they changed in Dota2, but atleast there was quite big uprade atleast with game update (+25% roughly).

#5412970

eclap

2017-03-27 16:55

Watched this video this morning. Most of the differences are within margin of error.

#5412971

rl66

2017-03-27 16:55

So the poor gaming performance is due to another issue. Maybe a game engine with 'proper' optimization will bring some improvements, if not poor game performance will continue on until Ryzen 2.

So exept in bench ryzen is not an Intel killer (with on top of that, price not so low as anounced).and with Intel mainstream with over 4 core (yay at last ) with new socket in a few. so it's a 50% success (i am 50% happy for them but was expecting more).

#5412973

rl66

2017-03-27 17:01

7700K is 4.8GHz and ryzen 4.0GHz so add another 20% for ryzen and compare clock to clock and situation changes in favor of ryzen so i think amd has done good job with ryzen.

clock to clock is stupid as they haven't the same reference architecture. (it's like comparing a pentium D 955 VS a core 2 duo clock to clock). even with difference of clock they should be compared stock clock.

#5412976

eclap

2017-03-27 17:08

7700K is 4.8GHz and ryzen 4.0GHz so add another 20% for ryzen and compare clock to clock and situation changes in favor of ryzen so i think amd has done good job with ryzen.

Since when is 7700k 4.8ghz?

#5412977

Dazz

2017-03-27 17:08

Well memory bandwidth seems to increase performance quite a bit, kinda reminds me of the P4 netburst where high latency cache prefers high bandwidth memory, same for the AMD FX chips. However not sure if this is memory bandwidth or the fact the bus speed has increased from 100MHz to 123MHz increasing PCI-e throughput significantly which much like the AMD FX overclocking the HT yielded very good performance gains. Since all traffic is going through this 4x PCIe 3.0 connection 4GB/sec each direction graphics cards start taking a noise drive at this speed and have other stuff connected to it i think that extra 23MHz = 23% more data traffic will help more than the memory it's self. Good luck getting to 3600MHz memory need Samsung chips to do that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZS2XHcQdqA#t=0.151099

#5412979

isidore

2017-03-27 17:16

Since when is 7700k 4.8ghz?

Since it's saying in the screens. He is referring to the speed they run the benches.

#5412980

Unilythe

2017-03-27 17:16

Since when is 7700k 4.8ghz?

A bit tunnelvision here. Since when is Ryzen 4.0GHz? They're both clocked higher in his example. They're obviously both overclocked numbers. Both frequencies are the most reliable overclocks for said CPU's.

#5412981

BlueRay

2017-03-27 17:18

Intel may be advancing slowly and milking the market but they are still the top performer for gaming reasons. As I see it Intel is the choice for gaming and AMD for everything else or a mix of those. Those who use their PC strictly for gaming they are better off with Intel.

#5412984

Camaxide

2017-03-27 17:22

Since when is 7700k 4.8ghz?

Did you even look at the test..?

#5412987

eclap

2017-03-27 17:31

Did you even look at the test..?

I watched the full video this morning.

#5412996

Kaarme

2017-03-27 17:52

7700K is 4.8GHz and ryzen 4.0GHz so add another 20% for ryzen and compare clock to clock and situation changes in favor of ryzen so i think amd has done good job with ryzen.

Let's talk about clock to clock when AMD and GloFo manage to get the clocks up. Until that time, no Kaby Lake owner is going to downclock their expensive CPU.

so it's a 50% success (i am 50% happy for them but was expecting more).

100% successful at forcing Intel to finally consider 6-core mainstream.

#5413002

Nature007

2017-03-27 18:06

Test with mem 2666...hmmm

#5413003

edilsonj

2017-03-27 18:07

Core i3 @ 4.8GHz Core i5 @ 4.8GHz Core i7 @ 4.8GHz Overclocked Intel vs a stock 4GHz Ryzen (1800?). I really hate this.

#5413005

slickric21

2017-03-27 18:15

Core i3 @ 4.8GHz Core i5 @ 4.8GHz Core i7 @ 4.8GHz Overclocked Intel vs a stock 4GHz Ryzen (1800?). I really hate this.

If they could overclock the Ryzen higher than this they would, that's the point. They are s**t overclockers. Anyone can OC a Kaby Lake to 4.8

#5413009

H83

2017-03-27 18:19

I wasn´t expecting this one. I thought having all the cores in one cluster would be much better than having the cores divided between 2 clusters but i was completly wrong.

#5413010

Unilythe

2017-03-27 18:19

Core i3 @ 4.8GHz Core i5 @ 4.8GHz Core i7 @ 4.8GHz Overclocked Intel vs a stock 4GHz Ryzen (1800?). I really hate this.

Find me that stock 4GHz Ryzen please 😯 I'd love to be the only person in the world with a stock 4.0GHz Ryzen chip!

#5413011

AsiJu

2017-03-27 18:21

Seems 4+0 is just the same as 2+2 which both are worse than 4+4 or 3+3 if there even is a difference. Would mean the interconnect isn't the issue after all. To me that conclusion is actually positive.