French Magazine posts engineering sample AMD Ryzen Processor benchmarks
Click here to post a comment for French Magazine posts engineering sample AMD Ryzen Processor benchmarks on our message forum
BlueRay
I was wondering the same. Those graphs are way better than what I expected. And all this coming from an early ES underclocked chip without the proper driver support. I never expected to be so close to Intel's offerings. That being said I can't wait for the final product reviews it's going to be interesting.
Lane
The tests have been done a good time ago... as pointed in the magazine, they are not representative of the final product.
theres many things to consider: board are obviously too engineer samples with bios as they are, let alone the cpu, who was clocked effectively really low. ( as stated in the article, the performance are relative to this clock speed. ). Let alone, early ES samples like that can even got some little things, here and there disabled.
We dont have the individual numbers, so hard to see in what softwares and games, they are close, faster or slower.
And when i see the result on a system like that, at thoses clock speed, im really surprised in good.
Its a 8cores, so turbo boost will have some limitations, 4 cores could been clocked even way higher then on the final products.
SuperAverage
This.
The "%" listings thrown off an easy way to write it down, but IPC looks stronger, at least in some cases, than the 6x00 series.
fry178
ryzen is fast enough including games, to get intel to lower prices.
the fact i can now get a 8/16 cpu (instead of the 6 core 5820),
that will work nice on optimized software and still not affect gaming performance negatively.
now i just want the price to be below 300$ and motherboards under 200....
poornaprakash
Ryzen is ZEN
Something really good about to happen for PC users after a decade :banana:
gx-x
you already have a cpu that is as good as new amd. Most of us do. Why bother? :3eyes: They are late. Someone buying new PC? Ok, sure. Let's see the real pricing of the whole combo when this thing comes out. I dont expect it to be cheaper than intel tho...
Valken
Those gaming benchmarks actually looks good! 3.4 GHZ vs 4.4 GHZ Haswell vs 4.2 GHZ Skylake within 10% or so... damn good...
Lets see those cores work 1:1 ghz and core to core!
I feel its AMD X2 and 64 all over again!
moaka
Never change my 4790k for zen ... But its a real cpu for amd now .
chispy
Ryzen is looking good !
nicugoalkeper
I was expecting even better numbers, and may still get the at the final release.
BUT the price will be everything and i don't think that until winter next year we will get a good price. Still we may hope and pray 😛 (i don't think AMD will go under 25% of what Intel has toady). And as long as consoles only use 8 core few games will be optimize for more ! So only for a work station you will need more. My opinion.
Still at the moment welcome back AMD !
Still got a new I6700k (@260 Euro) after i won a new MAXIMUM RANGER VIII and a 16 GB ram DDR4. So will have to wait some time for the next gen CPU's until i will upgrade again (i wanted to get a ZEN to last for a few year ( 🙁 ) but my money is scares so free MB and memory made my choice. I'm not that optimistic about AMD prices.
gx-x
well, if we look how they deal with nvidia, 25% less would be generous...add mobo to that cpu and so on...idk, we shall see. CPU will be better for sure when it comes out, this is eng sample, low clock etc.
nz3777
I think sr-5 is lookin good at $250- 6/12 threads still $250 seems a bit unreasonable $200 would be a (Killer) deal for that cpu and would maybe steal some of Intels x-99 crowd if ya know what I mean?
robintson
With this benchmarks AMD Zen shows that this Zen 8 core cpu is about 20 % slower than Intel i7 6900k cpu, but the turbo frequency is lower at about 10 % too (3.4 GHz max turbo freq.for 8 core Zen and 3,7 GHz max turbo freq. for Intel i7 6900k). If AMD can manage to sell Zen cpu's for less than 400 US$, than AMD can and will have a great success with Zen, otherwise I think that they will miss this great chance for a comeback from surviving corporation to a successful corporation.
robintson
I agree with you , but let's not forget that intel's K cpu's can overclock as well to say 4 GHz and beyond
fry178
@gx-x
amd wont beat intel in overall, but close and with lower heat, which hopefully helps ocing.
and they cant go +350$ for the 8C or ppl wont buy, a premium maybe for binned chips clocking 4ish.
Seikon
Now you se , those 350$ wont hapen for the 8 core , if it's close to intel they will put it more like 500$ , unles intel droops the price of course
k3vst3r
Saw leak saying $350 for the Ryzen 8c/16t standard edition 3.4Ghz. Was $500 for the black edition specially binned Ryzen 8c/16t.
Ryu5uzaku
Well tbh if this is close to skylake in ipc then it is way faster then mine or yours clock for clock. Sky lake is in the end quite a bit faster then similarly clocked ivys or sandys.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sx1kLGVAF0
Is maybe the best comparison I've seen regarding similar cpu performance on same clocks.
Lane
Guys, you jump fast on price and performance, based on this test ( who is not and was not intended as a review, but for compare the evolution of multiple architectures ( including the seven generations of Intel cores. )
- ES Samples with extremely low clock ( specially on turbo boost as said in the french newspapers ), we dont have the clock, but we cant even know if it was run at 3.2 ghz on games. ) early AO samples, can mean even some parts are disabled. ( turbo not working as intended etc, senseMI features etc ).
- We dont know the scaling of clock vs performance. ( is 100mhz on Intel mean 100mhz on Zen ? )
- Beta motherboard, with test bios ( as mentionned in the article ).
- We dont have individual numbers, so its impossible to know if the results are close, far, better and in what case, softwares, games.
So by all mean there, what you have is hardly more than a minimum. If you want to compare IPC, we will need clock to clock tests in different scenarios.
Some professional benchmark suite ( as 3Dmax 2015) are not forcibly yet completely optimized anyway and dont forcibly represent the 3Dmax 2017 performance same goes for other softwares.
nz3777
Nicely said! 🙂
