Close
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Showing results 1 to 10 of 35
  1. #1

    Default AMD's new Ryzen chip.

    Hey guys,

    I'm in the process of building a new PC for 10 boxing. So, AMD is releasing their new chips in like two weeks and prices were leaked, so they're looking to be like $400~ for the Ryzen1800 which has 8 cores and 16 threads. And I'm hoping for some input from people who are better with computers than I am. (I just know more cores = better for boxing).


    Here are some various articles I have found about the chips saying in some benchmarks they are going "toe to toe" with the 6900k

    http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700x-processor-tested/

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...the-cpu-market


    So, I have never ever dealt with AMD. But, would these releases be worth trying them? I mean 8/16, that's like the 6900k which would be overkill for 10 boxing I'd imagine. (Right now I can do 5 with 40% on my 4770k).

  2. #2
    Multiboxologist MiRai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Winter Is Coming
    Posts
    5782

    Default

    There aren't any official benchmarks yet, so no one knows how well the chip performs (except the handful of people on the inside). The "more cores = better performance" is absolutely true when sticking to a single manufacturer across similar generations, but you can't make simple comparisons like that when dealing with different types of chips. Since, if "more cores = better performance" was always true, then the AMD FX-8350 with 8 cores at $150 would rival Intel's 6900K with 8 cores at $1,000. However, there's a very large difference in terms of performance between those chips, and, in this case, the price tag reflects that.

    I'd love for AMD to finally offer some competition to Intel and I'm hoping that Ryzen does just that, but until benchmarks are out, we don't know the answer to your question.
    Do not send me a PM if what you want to talk about isn't absolutely private. Ask your questions on the forum where others can also benefit from the information.

    Author of the almost unknown and heavily neglected blog: Multiboxology

  3. #3

    Default

    I'm with MiRai. To further that, the first round of "official" benchmarks should be taken as incomplete data on general principle as it usually takes a few months of various people running them before we find out which synthetic benchmarks favor which processors and where the lurking demons (e.g. bugs) lie.
    Now playing: WoW (Garona)

  4. #4

    Default

    I don't even pay attention to benchmarks before something is available in retail. =)

  5. #5

    Default

    And we dont know how well if run when muti client.

    To be fair i might just get one and upgrade my amd cpu i have now.
    Jamba Addon Developer:

    Follow me on
    Twitter

    Jamba: Jamba

    EU: Blossom#2756



  6. #6

    Default

    I was actually coming here to see I feel anyone had talked about this yet.

    heres a link to some info. From 2/22

    so I'm planning on building myself a new computer. I built my wife a new one, and...I'm kinda jealous

    heres my question though.


    i have an mad fx8320 that I've overclocked to 4.3ghz. Would I really see a performance increase swapping to a processor with a lower base clock (I.e the lower tier ryzen 7) than what my current CPU is running at? Currently I see around 25 fps with 5x toons all on low. Ideally if I were to upgrade to a latest gen processor I'd expect to be able to play with the lead toon on ultra.
    Last edited by Xixillia : 02-23-2017 at 12:51 AM
    Multiboxing since WoW:BC - MY YOUTUBE!

  7. #7
    Multiboxologist MiRai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Winter Is Coming
    Posts
    5782

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xixillia View Post
    This is what people are hoping for, and if the final results are even remotely close to that, then I think we'll see Intel have to cut some prices sooner than later.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xixillia View Post
    heres my question though.

    i have an mad fx8320 that I've overclocked to 4.3ghz. Would I really see a performance increase swapping to a processor with a lower base clock (I.e the lower tier ryzen 7) than what my current CPU is running at?
    Looking at the chart in your link, there's an AMD FX-9590 on there, which has a stock clock of 4.7GHz that is using the same architecture that you are currently are. So, assuming the chart is true, then I would say yes.

    The clockspeed of an apple, is not the same as the clockspeed of an orange, even if they're the same value. Clockspeed, in terms of what's printed on the box of the CPU, is not like MPH/KPH, where 100 MPH equals 100 MPH no matter what vehicle you're reading the speedometer in. Sure, if you had two identical CPUs with identical architecture, both in an identical setup, then 4GHz would equal 4GHz, but that's rarely ever the case.

    Also, you wouldn't normally compare your current overclock to the base clock of a newer CPU, unless you weren't going to overclock the new CPU, or you had data that showed how much performance was expected out of those CPUs with those specific clockspeeds and identical workloads.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xixillia View Post
    Currently I see around 25 fps with 5x toons all on low. Ideally if I were to upgrade to a latest gen processor I'd expect to be able to play with the lead toon on ultra.
    Your GPU plays a pretty large part in video settings and overall performance too.
    Do not send me a PM if what you want to talk about isn't absolutely private. Ask your questions on the forum where others can also benefit from the information.

    Author of the almost unknown and heavily neglected blog: Multiboxology

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xixillia View Post
    Would I really see a performance increase swapping to a processor with a lower base clock (I.e the lower tier ryzen 7) than what my current CPU is running at?
    I'd think that *if* the software you run could actually utilize the additional cores in parallel to generate more effective in-game MIPS, then all other things being equal, the answer should be yes. As we've noticed in past tests, that scaling doesn't always obtain due to other bottlenecks like GPU, as MiRai alluded to, or chipset interconnects, memory bus, cache efficiency, etc. Not to mention plain old optimization oversights.

    Also, don't forget that time-honored tradition of building a completely new system that doesn't seem that much faster on paper and "HOLEE SHEEIT this thing is SOOO much faster" because you don't have 3-years of registry shenanigans, heat-sink dust, and SSD wear leveling bogging things down.
    Now playing: WoW (Garona)

  9. #9

    Default

    Thoughts on Ryzen, now that some reviews are out?
    Multiboxing since WoW:BC - MY YOUTUBE!

  10. #10
    Multiboxologist MiRai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Winter Is Coming
    Posts
    5782

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xixillia View Post
    Thoughts on Ryzen, now that some reviews are out?
    Seeing as AMD's $400 and $500 chips are hanging out with Intel's $1000, and $1700 chips when it comes to multi-threading, I think it's very competitive in that area. However, single-threaded performance is slightly low, which might affect gamers in games which aren't very good at using multiple threads.
    Do not send me a PM if what you want to talk about isn't absolutely private. Ask your questions on the forum where others can also benefit from the information.

    Author of the almost unknown and heavily neglected blog: Multiboxology

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •