• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AMD has Ryzen? Eh, kinda

Well I finally got my ryzen in and I had to pair it with my 1080ti since I couldn't get the 1080 to work on it

It's running at 3.9ghz on air right now, waiting for my corsair bracket to come it for my liquid cooling

View attachment 67215280

View attachment 67215281

did you go with the 1700 at 3.9 or the 1700x?

odd the 1080 wouldn't work. still 3.9gig on air is pretty sweet what is the temp?
 
What the hell am I looking at in those pics? I've been building computers for 25 years and I can't see anything familiar. What is that circle thing for instance? The CPU cooler? And why are the memory slots lit up?

the circle thing is the air cooler and the memory had LED lights in it.
 
the circle thing is the air cooler and the memory had LED lights in it.

Thanks. What is the "wall" thing between the video card and the CPU and why does the MB look so sparsely populated with chips?
 
Thanks. What is the "wall" thing between the video card and the CPU and why does the MB look so sparsely populated with chips?

That is the video card. it is a NVidia 1080ti.
They have done a lot of shrinking of chips and consolidating things.

They don't need as many circuits on the boards as they use to.
that does a couple of things one is cut down on heat.

two it improves performance with less lag on the I/o sets.
 
Thanks. What is the "wall" thing between the video card and the CPU and why does the MB look so sparsely populated with chips?

Whats really gonna blow your mind, guess where the hard drive is
 
Whats really gonna blow your mind, guess where the hard drive is

you went with a m.2 HD?
hopefully after the MS patch coming up

you will see a huge boost in performance. right now all of the issues with ryzen are software
and some firm ware issues. although it looks like MSI is leading the way with the platinum boards

gigbyte and asus are falling way behind.
 
you went with a m.2 HD?
hopefully after the MS patch coming up

you will see a huge boost in performance. right now all of the issues with ryzen are software
and some firm ware issues. although it looks like MSI is leading the way with the platinum boards

gigbyte and asus are falling way behind.

Yeah and the slot is right behind the video card
 
Yep no heating issues?

The 3.9ghz ended up not being stable at 1.35v so I went down to 3.8ghz haven't had a chance to play with it much further. The temps seem fine although I get 3 different readings. The motherboard has its own temperature right there on the led panel, Ryzen has an application that seems to be just horrible and I have CPUid to check temps and volts
 
The 3.9ghz ended up not being stable at 1.35v so I went down to 3.8ghz haven't had a chance to play with it much further. The temps seem fine although I get 3 different readings. The motherboard has its own temperature right there on the led panel, Ryzen has an application that seems to be just horrible and I have CPUid to check temps and volts

yeah I have read that 3.8 is about the max, and that right now it isn't stable at 1.5 volts.
plus you need some kind of water cooler. better firm wear will fix that and the memory speed as well.
 
yeah I have read that 3.8 is about the max, and that right now it isn't stable at 1.5 volts.
plus you need some kind of water cooler. better firm wear will fix that and the memory speed as well.

Well it's running at 3.95 right now 1.45v and a little hotter than I'd like. As soon as corsair stops dragging thier feet and sends out the am4 bracket I'll put the liquid cooler on there and see how it does.
 
Well it's running at 3.95 right now 1.45v and a little hotter than I'd like. As soon as corsair stops dragging thier feet and sends out the am4 bracket I'll put the liquid cooler on there and see how it does.

Fun fact: the 1700X and 1800X intentionally report temperature 20C higher than it really is, so I bet there's a lot of people who are avoiding clocking higher than you have here because they're seeing dangerous temperatures. 1700 is a really good value.
 
Hoping that the Intel chips will fall in price because of Ryzen. My PC is almost 5 years old now (2500k) and should be replaced soonish and for the first time since hm the 1990s?... I am actually considering AMD. Of course I am also considering a gaming laptop.. so that is how crazy I am these days.
 
Hoping that the Intel chips will fall in price because of Ryzen. My PC is almost 5 years old now (2500k) and should be replaced soonish and for the first time since hm the 1990s?... I am actually considering AMD. Of course I am also considering a gaming laptop.. so that is how crazy I am these days.

Intel itself tends to give no ****s when it comes to MSRP. Newegg/Microcenter might respond somewhat, but really nothing has happened so far. Pure gaming, the 7700k will still be king. The AMD price equivalent just isn't a usage equivalent, so premium gamers are still going to pay that premium price.

Ryzen has been an abysmal launch, Ryzen 2.0 or whatever will be a bigger deal as far as competing with Intel goes. I suspect around this time next year we'll be hearing about mainstream-priced Intel hexacore processors. (and I've heard rumors of hyperthreading making it to the i5 line)
 
Intel itself tends to give no ****s when it comes to MSRP. Newegg/Microcenter might respond somewhat, but really nothing has happened so far. Pure gaming, the 7700k will still be king. The AMD price equivalent just isn't a usage equivalent, so premium gamers are still going to pay that premium price.

Hmm Intel has already slashed prices and are rumoured to slash even more because of the R5.

Ryzen has been an abysmal launch, Ryzen 2.0 or whatever will be a bigger deal as far as competing with Intel goes. I suspect around this time next year we'll be hearing about mainstream-priced Intel hexacore processors. (and I've heard rumors of hyperthreading making it to the i5 line)

Heh, funny. I have heard the opposite basically. The only place I have heard such a negative view is from Intel fanboys. AMD fanboys are of course all about AMD, but from the some what middle ground, the reception of Ryzen has been positive. Yes the 1080p gaming benchmarks are not what people expected... for now.

You simply cant beat the power vs price from the new AMD processors. Of course hardcore gamers will go for the best of the best, which technically still is Intel (at least until AMD and motherboard producers improve bios and firmware and such.), however they are a small minority of the overall PC world. For me the hardcore gamers buy "e-penis" machines to brag how great their rigs are and how much they can overclock. The 99.9% of the rest of the planet dont care.

The key test will be with the Ryzen 5 chips, which are in direct competition with the i5, which like it or not is the most popular processor class. There are no independent benchmarks yet of course, but once they are out there, then we shall see.

Like it or not, Ryzen is not far behind if at all of the equivalent Intel chips... and price wise they are on another planet and I for one welcome AMD back, as being under the Intel price dictation for over a decade is .. not good.
 
Fun fact: the 1700X and 1800X intentionally report temperature 20C higher than it really is, so I bet there's a lot of people who are avoiding clocking higher than you have here because they're seeing dangerous temperatures. 1700 is a really good value.

It's not intentional as far as I can tell just poor sensors. It's also the 1700 btw, I'm running a stress test on my ryzen now to make sure this is a good OC until the corsair bracket comes in (3.7 ghz @ 1.2v) and the mobo temp shows 73C but aida64 and cpuid show 59C
 
Hmm Intel has already slashed prices and are rumoured to slash even more because of the R5.
That was bad reporting from a tech blog. They looked at prices at Microcenter and assumed it was a price drop. However, these were Microcenter's prices from before the Ryzen series even launched. Microcenter always sells CPUs below MSRP as a loss-lead.

Intel hasn't changed MSRP at all. Newegg and Amazon haven't cut prices. This was a mistake on part of a crappy blogger.

Heh, funny. I have heard the opposite basically. The only place I have heard such a negative view is from Intel fanboys. AMD fanboys are of course all about AMD, but from the some what middle ground, the reception of Ryzen has been positive. Yes the 1080p gaming benchmarks are not what people expected... for now.
There's an extremely short list of compatible memory. The X-series chips are (deliberately) reporting higher temperatures. Motherboard manufacturers had only a few weeks to prepare BIOSes, resulting in serious bugs and some boards outright bricking themselves. Microsoft's task scheduler isn't properly handling the architecture. A little more time was needed to iron that out. They pushed the product out the door about a month sooner than they should have, because they wanted Q1 sales numbers.

It will get better, but their technology is still fundamentally worse than Intel's. But the R7 line isn't a pure gaming line of chips. Like I said, they aren't the same usage as the Intel quad-cores. They're competition for the 6800/6900, which they beat out in value by a longshot when it comes to many-threaded operations. (content creators will love this product, someone trying to get into twitch streaming or running a youtube channel, or other encoding work at home, just got a huge drop in price of entry)

You simply cant beat the power vs price from the new AMD processors. Of course hardcore gamers will go for the best of the best, which technically still is Intel (at least until AMD and motherboard producers improve bios and firmware and such.), however they are a small minority of the overall PC world. For me the hardcore gamers buy "e-penis" machines to brag how great their rigs are and how much they can overclock. The 99.9% of the rest of the planet dont care.
This is a different argument. My point was about Intel not dropping prices. They aren't going to drop prices on their flagship quad-core CPUs because they still have the performance lead. They have better IPC, combined with better clockspeeds. They're happy to have the higher-priced, higher-performing products. They've been doing that for over a decade now.

Bios fixes will not put Ryzen on top of Intel. The chips aren't capable of that. The i5/i7 line is well-refined at this point, that's how you're seeing people get 5ghz out of the 7600/7700 chips. Ryzen will still need a year or two to improve their process.

The key test will be with the Ryzen 5 chips, which are in direct competition with the i5, which like it or not is the most popular processor class. There are no independent benchmarks yet of course, but once they are out there, then we shall see.
The lower core-count chips are still on the same architecture. They're going to have the same IPC and I've no reason to expect they'll end up clocking much higher, if any. The R5's will still perform worse than the i5s. They'll be a great value, though.

Like it or not, Ryzen is not far behind if at all of the equivalent Intel chips... and price wise they are on another planet and I for one welcome AMD back, as being under the Intel price dictation for over a decade is .. not good.
Yes, at no point did I suggest Intel had a better price/performance ratio.
It's not intentional as far as I can tell just poor sensors. It's also the 1700 btw, I'm running a stress test on my ryzen now to make sure this is a good OC until the corsair bracket comes in (3.7 ghz @ 1.2v) and the mobo temp shows 73C but aida64 and cpuid show 59C
No, AMD released a statement in response to the people confused about temperatures. tCTL is offset +20c from Tj. But only on the X series chips.

https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/03/13/amd-ryzen-community-update

Bizarre freaking choice. They do it to keep the chips cooler - systems will kick their CPU fans into higher gear at lower actual temperatures. But why? My best guess is that "XFR" feature found on the X-models will sometimes boost the CPU to uncomfortable temperature levels when left to its own devices, so this was an easier way to trick the boost logic into only using XFR when the cooling system is performing well enough.

I agree 100% that I'm really glad to see AMD back in the game. They aren't beating Intel in performance, but they've got that "value option" appeal back. before it was "these chips are cheap but they're so crap I can't recommend them."
 
Happy to see AMD back in the game, even if illusionary, some folks will take the bait. Me, not yet, but I am or will be in the market for a new gaming box within a year. I had resigned myself to the fact that it would be Intel again, however, I may just have to rethink that, and given some time to hash things out, AMD might just well come up with a price-per-performance chip that appeals to the average gamer..

Tim-
 
Happy to see AMD back in the game, even if illusionary, some folks will take the bait. Me, not yet, but I am or will be in the market for a new gaming box within a year. I had resigned myself to the fact that it would be Intel again, however, I may just have to rethink that, and given some time to hash things out, AMD might just well come up with a price-per-performance chip that appeals to the average gamer..

Tim-

I think the secret winner here is the R7 1700. Comparable price to the 7700k, overclocks up to virtually the same capacity as the 1700X and 1800X, and doesn't have that atrociously stupid temperature misreporting "feature" that will only serve to make CPU fans go full-bore under load. A solid gaming chip + productivity bonus of 8 cores for the price of a high end 4-core.

In the lower end, whichever highest-rated 4core/8thread model they have will be the budget game winner. It wont match the Skylake chips, but it will be a good value. CPU is generally the lesser factor when it comes to the end-result of game performance.
 
That was bad reporting from a tech blog. They looked at prices at Microcenter and assumed it was a price drop. However, these were Microcenter's prices from before the Ryzen series even launched. Microcenter always sells CPUs below MSRP as a loss-lead.

Intel hasn't changed MSRP at all. Newegg and Amazon haven't cut prices. This was a mistake on part of a crappy blogger.

Fine. Time will tell.

There's an extremely short list of compatible memory. The X-series chips are (deliberately) reporting higher temperatures. Motherboard manufacturers had only a few weeks to prepare BIOSes, resulting in serious bugs and some boards outright bricking themselves. Microsoft's task scheduler isn't properly handling the architecture. A little more time was needed to iron that out. They pushed the product out the door about a month sooner than they should have, because they wanted Q1 sales numbers.

Bla bla bla, new product dude. Bugs happen and they get fixed. Every time Intel releases new chips and chipsets, it is followed by bug repairs constantly.

It will get better, but their technology is still fundamentally worse than Intel's. But the R7 line isn't a pure gaming line of chips. Like I said, they aren't the same usage as the Intel quad-cores. They're competition for the 6800/6900, which they beat out in value by a longshot when it comes to many-threaded operations. (content creators will love this product, someone trying to get into twitch streaming or running a youtube channel, or other encoding work at home, just got a huge drop in price of entry)

No it is not worse.. the differences are small. Yes AMD R7 does not beat the top end Intel chips, but the difference is minimal. I have seen rendering tests where the difference was under 3 minutes.. but the price is 50% lower for the R7 chip and THAT is key.

This is a different argument. My point was about Intel not dropping prices. They aren't going to drop prices on their flagship quad-core CPUs because they still have the performance lead. They have better IPC, combined with better clockspeeds. They're happy to have the higher-priced, higher-performing products. They've been doing that for over a decade now.

We shall see. If I am standing there and thinking about a new system and it is between an R7 at 500 bucks, vs a 1000 dollar Intel system and the R7 is 8-10% worse off than the Intel, well I certainly would choose the R7 alone based on price. Had the performance differences been massive (like the old days), then no, but come on we are talking at the moment about a 50% price difference for slight performance decrease. It is a no brainer.

Bios fixes will not put Ryzen on top of Intel. The chips aren't capable of that.

Optimisations of software/games for the Ryzen chip will help. Improvements of Bios will also help despite what you are saying. Fixing bugs always is better no?

The i5/i7 line is well-refined at this point, that's how you're seeing people get 5ghz out of the 7600/7700 chips. Ryzen will still need a year or two to improve their process.

And that is in massively expensive rigs for god sake.

They'll be a great value, though.

THATS THE WHOLE POINT! Even back in the day, AMD was know as the cheap version of Intel chips. Now that gap became massive over the last decade, to such a degree that you could not justify buying an AMD anymore because the value was simply not there. It is back, and big time.

I agree 100% that I'm really glad to see AMD back in the game. They aren't beating Intel in performance, but they've got that "value option" appeal back. before it was "these chips are cheap but they're so crap I can't recommend them."

No one said they were beating Intel on performance (other than AMD)! As always it comes down to the specific task, test or program. Some places they are beating Intel on performance and others they are not. The point is, that their value is far superior to Intel (hence Intel needs to cut prices to stay competitive), and for some tasks/games they are superior to Intel.
 
Happy to see AMD back in the game, even if illusionary, some folks will take the bait. Me, not yet, but I am or will be in the market for a new gaming box within a year. I had resigned myself to the fact that it would be Intel again, however, I may just have to rethink that, and given some time to hash things out, AMD might just well come up with a price-per-performance chip that appeals to the average gamer..

Tim-

Why is that a bad thing? and what price range is the "average gamer" interested in?
 
No it is not worse.. the differences are small. Yes AMD R7 does not beat the top end Intel chips, but the difference is minimal. I have seen rendering tests where the difference was under 3 minutes.. but the price is 50% lower for the R7 chip and THAT is key.

We shall see. If I am standing there and thinking about a new system and it is between an R7 at 500 bucks, vs a 1000 dollar Intel system and the R7 is 8-10% worse off than the Intel, well I certainly would choose the R7 alone based on price. Had the performance differences been massive (like the old days), then no, but come on we are talking at the moment about a 50% price difference for slight performance decrease. It is a no brainer.

Except its not, Intel has a $400 6 core/12 thread chip (i7-6800k) thats as good or better than the ryzen 7 chip
 
Except its not, Intel has a $400 6 core/12 thread chip (i7-6800k) thats as good or better than the ryzen 7 chip

You keep doing this.. which Ryzen chip are you comparing it to? It seems you dont understand that AMD has all but caught up to Intel, and at a lower price point. Intel will have to react to this, as price is king for 99% of consumers. The more and more you diss AMD and favour Intel, the more I suspect you are nothing but an Intel fanboy. I could care less.. I go for value for money and here AMD has caught up big time and that is what most reviewers are pointing out.
 
You keep doing this.. which Ryzen chip are you comparing it to?

All the ryzen 7's are the same chip just binned differently

It seems you dont understand that AMD has all but caught up to Intel, and at a lower price point.

well ryzen is 7% behind Intel's kaby lake in IPC and 12% behind in clock speed and like I said its only a lower price point compared to the 6900k, the 6800k can match the ryzen in multi core and the 7700k can dominate the ryzen in gaming

Intel will have to react to this, as price is king for 99% of consumers.

They already have, the skylake-x and kabylake-x lines are coming out this summer

The more and more you diss AMD and favour Intel, the more I suspect you are nothing but an Intel fanboy. I could care less.. I go for value for money and here AMD has caught up big time and that is what most reviewers are pointing out.

Might I suggest that you actually read this thread and look at the pics I posted of the $1800 ryzen system i just built. I dont care about brands, I care about performance.
 
Back
Top Bottom