First Ryzen 7 1700X Review finds its way onto the web
Click here to post a comment for First Ryzen 7 1700X Review finds its way onto the web on our message forum
mrbull3tproof
So basically when go to benchmarks Ryzen is pretty good but still quite worse in games. With the price 319 GBP in UK for 7700k or 4770k (290 GBP) there's no reason to go for more expensive 1700X (390 GBP). So much for the hype.
schmidtbag
I wonder why Bioshock did so poorly. Most of the other results don't really surprise me, when you consider the 1700X is dual channel while the Intel systems are triple.
@mrbull3tproof
There are hardly any games out there that can take advantage of 16 threads. Most hardly can take advantage of 8. So yeah, the 1700X is a poor choice for gamers, but I already knew that before seeing benchmarks for it.
PrMinisterGR
The website is down here.
EDIT: People are disappointed because the CPU is slower than all the archaic sh*t they tested? The only title with any meaningful difference for Intel was Bioshock Infinite which is using a modified Unreal Engine 3.0. Even in Firestrike 2013 (a four year old title), the 1700x wrecks everything from Intel except the ten-core CPU.
I'm waiting for Hilbert's tests which I actually do know will be much more all around.
BoMbY
From Iran? Aren't they under all kinds of blockades and embargoes?
JustinBulty
ontelo
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Administrator
sempron guy
I think it's important to note the ram paired is running only at 2133mhz. And sure why note compare it with a 7700k/6700k which we all know will exceed it and the 6950x out of all the broadwell-e processor on the line-up.:banana:
semitope
Silva
I stopped caring when I saw the resolutions used: 1366x768? 1600x900?
If these are valid, they're are hard at work making the processor look bad versus Intel. It's obvious that with lower clocks vs Intel they'll perform worse, but 16 threads aren't meant just for gaming...
Dude, do you game on a 1366x768 resolution monitor? Quite worse by how much: 1 to 10 fps? Shut up!
And not biased.
Finally someone intelligent.
A CPU is not made for games, it's made for processing things you do.
Kohlendioxidus
Seikon
Dat memory latency tho O_o , is that a bug ? or memory controler still needs some working
-Tj-
Higher ram @ 3000-3200MHz would definitely help by those cpu directx api bound games..
Looks like a bug, it doesn't read NB frequency either. I remember the same by Haswell rls..
Kohlendioxidus
AlmondMan
Well, it runs slower than all the Intel CPUs, the 7700k is up to 4.5ghz. Though the 4770k is only 3.9ghz by default.
The RAM speed difference, dunno, not really that relevant for overall performance I'd imagine.
JAMVA
Look at that score on CPU-Z! :banana:
Matches single thread with the 7700K and the mutlithreaded is double it , Ryzen has double the cores yes but that 7700K is at @ 4.5
INTEL You Scumbags! , you could have been giving us this for years! :mad2:
schmidtbag
Noisiv
I'd like to see Ryzen in true dog scenarios.
Going against cpu pigs, ie:
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
Flying sims, DCS
ARMA2/3, DayZ
WoW raiding
Nvidia PhysX
I couldn't care less about ideal gaming cases with model Multithreading.
For those kind of games you can keep your i5-760.
What I am concerned with gaming wise is, what's the worst case scenario.
Is Zen's IPC good enough to plow through pig code, or I am still better off with Intel.
eclap
Let down.
I'll wait for more reviews.
JAMF72
Observation:
-It is weird that the AIDA memory benchmark says the test was done with 2133 memory, but the tests system has the RAM listed as GSkill 3200 CL14 sticks.
-Some of the graphs are the bad type, not starting from 0. The Bioshock chart looks bad for Ryzen, but on 1080p it's a drop of 11.5% or the fastest CPU is 13% faster.
-looks like they tested it on a MSI B350 TOMAHAWK board.